HARI NARAIN SHUKLA Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. G.M. Kamil, learned counsel for petitioner and Mr. Devendra Mohan Shukla as well as Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, learned State Counsel on behalf of opposite parties.

(2.) Petition has been filed challenging order dtd. 9/8/2002 impounding sale deed dtd. 12/8/1985 executed in favour of petitioner, under Sec. 33 of the Indian Stamp Act,1899 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1899). Also under challenge is order dtd. 17/2/2003 rejecting petitioner's preliminary objections regarding maintainability of proceedings under the Act of 1899. Further prayer for quashing entire proceedings initiated under Ss. 33/40 of the Act of 1899 has also been sought.

(3.) Learned counsel for petitioner submits that a sale deed was executed in favour of petitioner by means of an unregistered instrument of transfer dtd. 12/8/1985. It is submitted that subsequently a suit for declaration under Sec. 229-B of U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (herein after referred to as the Act of 1950) was filed by petitioner and registered as Case No.87. It is submitted that aforesaid suit was decreed vide judgment and order dtd. 17/5/2002 whereafter an application for recall was filed and by means of order dtd. 20/8/2002, the initial judgment and order dtd. 17/5/2002 was recalled. It is submitted that proceedings thereafter ensued in aforesaid declaration suit but he does not have any instructions with regard to its current status.