GRUHA NIRMAN SAHAKARI SANSTHA LTD. Vs. CHANDRAKALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE , made returnable forthwith. Heard Shri V.H. Kedar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner; and Shri S.P. Bhandarkar, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. The challenge in this petition is to the order dated 31 -1 -2012 passed below application Exhibit 139 in Special Civil Suit No.979 of 2006 by the learned 2nd Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nagpur. The said application under Section of the Civil Procedure Code filed by the petitioner, who is the plaintiff, for calling back the document, i.e. the agreement of development and sale dated 27 -3 -2002 (for short, "the said document") from the office of the Collector of Stamps, Nagpur, for the purposes of tendering it in the evidence, has been rejected.

(2.) IN Special Civil Suit No.979 of 2006 filed by the petitioner/plaintiff, a specific performance of the said document is claimed. The said document was found to be insufficiently stamped and unregistered. Hence, the application Exhibit 86 for impounding of the said document was filed by the respondent Nos.1 to 5/defendants. It was rejected by the Trial Court on 1 -9 -2009. Hence, the respondent Nos.1 to 5/defendants preferred Writ Petition No.5337 of 2009 before this Court. This Court recorded the finding in its judgment dated 24 -2 -2010 that the said document grants permission to the petitioner/plaintiff to take possession and to develop the land in question and hence it was required to be compulsorily registered. In view of this, it was held that the said document was required to be impounded and sent for determination of the stamp duty in accordance with law. The order dated 1 -9 -2009 was accordingly quashed and set aside and the application Exhibit 86 for impounding of the said document was allowed.

(3.) WHEN the said document was sent for impounding by the Trial Court to the Collector of Stamps, the matter was at the stage of recording of evidence of the petitioner/plaintiff. After the order was passed by the Collector of Stamps, the Trial Court took up the matter for recording the further evidence. At that stage, the petitioner/plaintiff filed an application Exhibit 131 under Section of the Civil Procedure Code on 31 -1 -2012 for calling back the said document from the office of the Collector of Stamps, Nagpur, for being tendered in evidence. This application has been rejected by the Trial Court by the impugned order dated 31 -1 -2012. It has been held that the said document has not been impounded as yet and hence it cannot be called. The Trial Court, therefore, passed an order to proceed further with the matter for recording of evidence.