ORDER 1. Leave granted. 2. It is accepted that the document dated 14.04.1993 purporting to be an unregistered sale deed was marked as Exhibit No. A-1 on 27.11.2006. 3. In view of the aforesaid position, we do not think that the impugned judgment passed by the High Court directing that the aforesaid document should be de-marked and not be treated as an exhibit, is correct and in accordance with law. Once a document has been admitted in evidence, such admission cannot be called in question at any stage of the suit or proceedings on the ground that the instrument has not been duly stamped. Objection as to admissibility of a document on the ground of sufficiency of stamp, has to raised when the document is tendered in evidence. 4. Thereafter, it is not open to the parties, or even the court to re- examine the order or issue.[1] To this extent, the impugned judgment is set aside and the appeal is allowed. [1] See Javer Chand and Ors. Vs. Pukhraj Surana, (1962) 2 SCR 333 and Shyamal Kumar Roy Vs. Sushil Kumar Agarwal, (2006) 11 SCC 331 . 5. We clarify that we have not commented or examined the question of effect of purported non-registration of the sale deed in terms of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 and the Registration Act, 1908. These questions and issues are left open to be decided by the trial court. All pleas and contentions raised by the parties in this regard can be raised before the trial court, which will examine the said aspect and other issues without being influenced by the present order and the impugned judgment. 6. The appeals are allowed in the aforesaid terms, without an order as to costs. 7. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.