VEESARAPU PADMA Vs. RANGINENI ANITHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition is filed aggrieved by order dated 11.02.2013 in O.S. No.90 of 2008 passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Suryapet, wherein the Court below overruled the objection of the revision petitioner/defendant regarding the objection taken to mark Ex.A1, agreement of sale on the ground that it requires stamp duty and also registration, since Ex.A1 agreement of sale shows possession was delivered as on the date of execution to the respondent/plaintiff.

(2.) Brief facts which are necessary for disposal of the Civil Revision Petition are as follows:

(3.) Learned counsel for the revision petitioner contends that the agreement of sale dated 21.01.2004, which is sought to be marked as Ex.A1 contains a clause regarding delivery of possession. As such, payment of stamp duty is required under Article 47 A of Schedule IA of Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (for brevity 'the Act'). When once the document is of sale and liable for payment of stamp duty, unless necessary stamp duty and penalty is paid by impounding the document, the same cannot be received under evidence under Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act. He also contends so far as the procedure for impounding the document under Section 33 of the Act, the Court below has not considered the effect of Sections 33 and Section 35 read with Article 47A Schedule 1A of Act and erroneously over ruled the objection raised by the revision petitioner on the ground that already an amount of Rs.35,000/- was deposited by way of challan for purchase of stamps by the respondent/plaintiff.