K SIVAKANTH REDDY Vs. P RAMANJANEYULU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition has been filed by the plaintiffs in O.S.No.245 of 2007 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge at Bhongir, Nalgonda District.

(2.) The plaintiffs filed the above suit for injunction. Along with the plaint, they filed an agreement of sale and some other documents. During pendency of the suit, the counsel for the plaintiffs filed a Memo stating that the matter is settled amicably out of Court and the plaintiffs intends to withdraw the suit as not pressed. In view of the Memo and in the presence of both parties, the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Bhongir dismissed the suit as not pressed without costs, through the order dated 13.07.2007. Later the plaintiffs filed I.A.No.656 of 2007 under Order 13, Rule VII (2) read with Section 151 of C.P.C. requesting the Court to return the unmarked documents including the agreement of sale dated 17.10.2006. The trial Court ordered return of documents 2 to 5 and in respect of document No.1 i.e., agreement of sale, the trial Court withheld the same observing that the document is insufficiently stamped and the same has to be treated as a document under Section 47 (A) of the Indian Stamp Act and to be considered as a sale deed as the agreement was coupled with possession, which has to be impounded by collecting stamp duty and penalty. The trial Court further directed that if the plaintiffs are willing to pay the stamp duty and penalty in the Court, the Section to collect the amount or else to send the document to the Collector for levying of stamp duty and penalty and thereafter return the document to the plaintiffs.

(3.) Being aggrieved by the order of the Junior Civil Judge, Bhongir, dated 13.07.2007, the present Civil Revision Petition has been filed contending that as the suit was disposed of, the Court became functus officio, therefore, it ought to have returned the unmarked document without resorting to collect the stamp duty and penalty on agreement of sale; that the trial Court ought to have observed that no relief is sought for on the basis of the document and it is only a document filed for collateral purpose; that the trial Court has no power to impound the document after disposal of the suit and Section 33 of the Indian Stamp Act has no application to the present case.