KOTTUR VISWANDHAM Vs. KOTTUR RAJESWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned Counsel on both sides.

(2.) The short question, which arises for decision in this C.R.P., is whether the award dated 20-2-1993 passed by the arbitrators is inadmissible in evidence for non-payment of requisite stamp duty and for want of registration. The facts leading to the Revision Petition may be briefly stated.

(3.) The petitioners herein and the respondent are brothers. There was apartition of their family properties in the year 1985 during the life-time of their father Gangaiah. In the said division the father was allotted one house property situated in Devi Road, Nizamabad. The father subsequently died in June, 1991. After the death of the father, the respondent herein came to be in sole occupation and possession of the house property which was alloted to the father in the earlier partition. After the death of the father, disputes arose between the brothers regarding the partition of their properties. The disputes were referred by them to arbitrators on 16-7-1992. The arbitrators passed their award on 20-2-1993. The arbitrators decided that it was not desirable to disturb the partition made in 1985. So far as the house property belonging to the father, which was ih the sole occupation of the respondent, is concerned, the arbitrators decided that the value of the said property is to the tune of Rs.13,00,000/-. In the award passed by them the arbitrators directed the respondent to pay Rs.6,00,000/- to the first petitioner, Rs.6,00,000/- to the second petitioner and Rs.1,00,000/- to the third petitioner within three .months from the date of the award if the respondent wanted to retain the said house property for himself. If the respondent failed to pay the said amount within the stipulated time, he was to deliver possession of the said house to petitioners 1 and 2 herein who shall be entitled to enjoy the same with equal rights and petitioners 1 and 2, in turn, were directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- to the third petitioner. On an application filed by the petitioners, the arbitrators filed the award into the Court. Thereafter the petitioners filed O.P. No.14 of 93 to make the award rule of the Court. At the time of trial when the award was sought to-be marked, the respondent raised an objection with regard to the admissibility of the award since it is not properly stamped and it is also not registered. After hearing both the parties, the lower Court, by the impugned order dated 8th September, 1998, held that the award is inadmissible in evidence for want of stamp duty and registration.