YENNAMREDDY RAMA SUBBA REDDY Vs. YENNAMREDDY SEKHAR REDDY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner/defendant filed this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dtd. 24/7/2019 passed in I.A.No.95 of 2019 in O.S.No.294 of 2012 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kadapa, whereby the petition filed under the provisions of Sec. 33 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (for brevity 'the Stamp Act') for impounding the unregistered agreement of sale dtd. 18/9/1982 was dismissed.

(2.) The respondent/plaintiff filed a suit against the petitioner/defendant for partition of schedule mentioned properties and for separate possession of his share. The petitioner/defendant filed written statement. During the course of trial, the respondent/plaintiff adduced and closed his evidence. Then, the petitioner/defendant filed chief affidavit as DW1 and got marked Exs.B.1 to B.8. At that stage, the petitioner/defendant filed the application under Sec. 33 of the Stamp Act for sending the unregistered agreement of sale dtd. 18/9/1982 executed by one Chinthakunta Venkata Reddy in his favour in respect of land in an extent of Ac.11.5 cents situated in Circar Punji D.No.1211/1 and D.No.1211/2 with specific boundaries. However, the trial Court dismissed the petition holding that even if the unregistered agreement of sale dtd. 18/9/1982 is sent for impounding, no purpose would be served as it is not a curable defect and the said document cannot be received as evidence even for a collateral purpose. Being aggrieved by the dismissal of the application, this civil revision petition came to be filed.

(3.) Mrs. M.Siva Jyothi, learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the trial Court grossly erred in holding that the agreement of sale is an outright sale as entire sale consideration had been paid and possession was delivered, which is contrary to the definition of "sale" under Sec. 54 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. The agreement of sale does not by itself create any interest in the property even if the entire sale consideration is paid and possession is delivered. The finding of the trial Court that as the agreement of sale is compulsorily registerable document, no purpose would be served even if it is sent for impounding, is illegal and contrary to law.