VAYYETI SRINIVASA RAO Vs. GAINEEDI JAGAJYOTHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This civil revision petition is filed by the petitioner/plaintiff under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the Orders passed by the learned V Additional District Judge, East Godavari at Rajamahendravaram, dtd. 21/12/2016, wherein and whereby the learned trial Judge held that Ex.A1 agreement of sale is liable for stamp duty and penalty, failing which marking of document as Ex.A1 will be eschewed.

(2.) The petitioner filed the suit against the respondent, seeking specific performance of agreement of sale, dtd. 14/10/2009 directing the defendant to execute a regular registered sale deed in respect of plaint schedule house property with an alternative relief of refund of advance amount of Rs.6,50,000.00 with interest with a relief of injunction restraining the respondent from alienating the plaint schedule property, pending disposal of the suit.

(3.) When the suit was coming up for trial, the petitioner filed his chief-examination affidavit in the suit as PW.1, on 27/11/2015. Then on 21/3/2016, the petitioner as PW.1 was sworn in. In further chiefexamination, Ex.A1 unregistered agreement of sale, dtd. 14/10/2009 marked subject to proof and relevancy of document. Ex.A2 office copy of legal notice, dtd. 8/4/2013, Ex.A3 postal acknowledgment and Ex.A4 reply notice, dtd. 4/5/2013 marked in his evidence which is noted in chief-examination. It appears that on 21/3/2016, the colleague of counsel for the respondent and counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff were present and after marking the said documents, the learned counsel for the respondent appeared before the Court, objected for marking of Ex.A1 agreement of sale on the ground that it is 'conveyance deed', though it is termed as 'agreement of sale' and it has to be treated as 'conveyance deed' and so stamp duty and penalty is to be paid and until and unless stamp duty and penalty is paid, the document cannot be marked and received in evidence. Then, the matter was adjourned to further date for hearing to hear with regard to admissibility of Ex.A1 and PW.1 was not cross-examined. After hearing both sides, the learned trial Judge by discussing the entire precedent law on subject with regard to Ex.A1 held that Ex.A1 agreement of sale is liable for stamp duty and penalty and directed the petitioner to pay stamp duty and penalty by 20/1/2017, failing which marking of document as Ex.A1 will be eschewed.