PUNEET SHANKER Vs. JOGA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Sudhir Kumar, Advocate for the defendant- revisionist as well as Sri R.C. Upadhyay, Advocate for the plaintiff-respondent.

(2.) THE revisionist before this Court was defendant in a suit which was for permanent injunction and cancellation of a sale deed which was executed by the plaintiff in favour of the defendant. Along with the plaint, the plaintiff had filed a copy of agreement for sale which was admittedly not registered or stamped. Immediately an objection was taken by the defendant that such a document is not admissible in evidence as it is neither stamped nor registered. Reliance has been placed by the revisionist on Sections 33 and 35 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (from hereinafter referred to as the Act). Section 33 of the Act reads as under :-

(3.) THIS Court has already stated above that the stage has not reached before the court below where the veracity of the document could be examined in terms of Sections 33 and 35 of the Act, and has therefore rightly dismissed the application of defendant/revisionist for impounding of the document.