K MOHAMMED RAFEE Vs. A G AKBAR SHERIEF

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE civil revision petition is directed against the order dated 20.10.2004, made in R.C.A,No.70 of 2002, on the file of the Rent Control Appellate Authority, confirming the fair and decretal order dated 28.10.2002, made in I.A.No.155 of 2002 in R.C.O.P.No.54 of 1999, on the file of the Rent Controller, II Additional District Munsif, Tiruchi.

(2.) IT is seen that the interlocutory application in I.A.No.155/2002 was filed before the Rent Controller to mark the Xerox copy of an unregistered document and the same was dismissed by the learned Rent Controller, since the appellant/tenant herein raised an objection while the original document was to be marked as inadmissible and on the basis of that objection, the same was not marked as Court document.

(3.) AFTER the hearing the arguments advanced by both sides, the learned Rent Controller passed an order on 7.2.2002 as the rent deed was for a period of two years and it could have been a registered document. Therefore, the Court below insisted to pay the stamp duty penalty, but both the parties did not mark the document as the party had to pay the stamp duty penalty and they have not preferred any appeal against the order dated 7.2.2002. Subsequently, the petitioner herein/tenant filed the petition seeking an order to mark the Xerox copy of the aforesaid rent deed dated 1.1.1994, which was objected to by the respondent herein as the original was produced before the Court and available to be marked as a document by the petitioner. The learned Rent Controller did not incline to accept the plea of the petitioner herein to mark the xerox copy. As contended by the learned counsel for the respondent, the original rent deed dated 1.1.1994 was available before the rent controller and the petitioner has every right to mark the same as a document, if he wants to rely on the document. But in order to avoid the payment of stamp duty penalty, he wanted to mark the Xerox copy of the document, while the original was available.