SURESH KUMAR Vs. SATISH MEHRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This objection petition under Section 34 challenges the Award of the Sole Arbitrator dated 19.4.2003. By the Award, specific performance has been granted of an Agreement to sell dated 21.3.2002 with respect to the second and third floor of the property bearing No. B-123, Swasthiya Vihar, Delhi, as per the Agreement to sell. The petitioner before this court, and who was the respondent in the arbitration proceedings, had in the arbitration proceedings raised an objection to the admitting of the Agreement to sell in evidence on the ground that the document was insufficiently stamped. Objection was that since the Agreement to sell is in the nature of part performance as per Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 and under which Agreement to sell possession was delivered, therefore, the said document was liable to be stamped under Article 23A of the Stamp Act, 1899 as applicable to Delhi but the stamp paper of the Agreement to sell was only of Rs. 50/- and hence the Agreement to sell was insufficiently stamped. Under Article 23A, the duty payable on a Sale Deed is also the duty payable under the Agreement to sell which is in the nature of part performance under Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 however, the stamp duty is paid not on the total value of the conveyance/sale deed but only on 90% of the value thereof. It was the contention of the petitioner that the Agreement to sell could not be considered as an evidence for passing of the Award under Section 35 of the Stamp Act, 1899 as the same was insufficiently stamped and therefore the deficient stamp duty alongwith the penalty was liable to have been paid before the document could have been looked into by the Arbitrator and for passing as Award thereon.

(2.) This objection as to the Agreement to sell being insufficiently stamped was taken in the written statement which was filed by the petitioner before the Arbitrator. The Arbitrator has dealt with this objection for the first time only in the Award and held as under:-

(3.) The provisions of the Stamp Act are not intended to prevent a document which is insufficiently stamped from being looked into for all times to come. The provisions are intended to see that there is no loss of revenue to the Government. Therefore, in my opinion, once the necessary stamp duty along with penalty is paid on the inadequately stamped instrument, then such a document can thereafter be looked into even by the court hearing objections to an Award treating the Award to be properly passed on merits, although the Arbitrator failed to impound the document at the necessary point of time.