RAMCHANDRA RASTOGI Vs. RADHEY SHYAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Having heard learned Counsel of either party, it transpires that after recording the evidence of landlord/plaintiff, as many as four adjournments were sought by the defendant for the purpose of cross-examining the plaintiff. Thereafter, an application was moved by him supplementing to the Court to impound the Rent Deed which was being relied by the plaintiff for the reason that such deed was under-stamped and the proper stamp had not been affixed on the same, as envisaged under the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act').

(2.) Learned counsel for the revisionist has taken this Court to Item No.35 of Schedule 1-B of the said Act as also to Entry No.15 of such Schedule, which deals with the proper affixation of Stamps on the lease deeds. Reliance has been made on the following precedents: -

(3.) All the laws, which have been relied on by learned counsel, indicate that if the objection relates to the deficiency of Stamp Duty of a document, the Court has to decide the objection first before proceeding further. However, in the opinion of this Court, all these precedents, do not have any application in the present controversy for the reason that the aforesaid authorities deal with a situation where the execution/genuineness of a document has not been disputed, and rather the controversy was raised only on the question of insufficiency of stamp. Whereas, in the matter, in hand, the tenant Ram Chandra Rastogi has averred that no rent deed was ever reduced into writing between the parties and his signatures were obtained only on a blank stamp paper, therefore, he has pleaded this rent deed to be a forged document.