MOHD QAMRUDDIN Vs. MASULA NARSIMHULU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel representing revision petitioners and Sri Anand representing Sri Y. Ashok Raj, representing respondent.

(2.) THIS Court ordered notice before admission on 28. 4. 2008 and granted interim stay for a limited period. The matter is coming up for admission.

(3.) SRI Venkat Raghu Ramulu learned counsel representing the revision petitioners would maintain that the learned Judge failed to see that the district Collector, Mahabubnagar, had rightly rejected for impounding the alleged agreement of sale dated 24. 6. 1995. The counsel also would maintain that the learned Judge failed to see that the alleged agreement of sale dated 24. 6. 1995 is a created and concocted document by the respondent herein for the purpose of filing the suit i. e. , O. S. No. 8 of 2003. The counsel also pointed out that the learned Judge failed to see that the alleged agreement of sale dated 24. 6. 1995 was not executed by anybody and the said document was got up by the respondent to knock away the valuable property of the petitioners. The learned counsel also would maintain that the District Collector is empowered to return the document without impounding the same, as the said document is not a genuine one and, hence, the order impugned in the civil revision petition cannot be sustained. The counsel also had taken this Court through the relevant provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure and also the Indian Stamp Act and further had taken this Court through the reasons, which had been recorded by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Narayanpet at paras 7 and 8 of the impugned order.