KAILASHCHANDRA Vs. DWARKADHEES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved by the order dated 3-9-12 passed by IX ADJ, Indore in Civil Suit No. 84-A/10 whereby application filed by petitioner under Section 151, CPC was dismissed, present petition has been filed. Short facts of the case are that the petitioner filed a suit for specific performance alleging that the petitioner entered into an agreement to purchase the suit property from respondent No. 1, for which agreement was executed on 22-6-07. It was alleged that as per agreement, balance consideration was to be paid within a period of two months. It was alleged that before expiry of that period the respondent No. 1 sold the property to the respondent No. 2 on 3-8-07. It was alleged that the petitioner was always ready and willing to purchase the property, therefore, suit filed by the petitioner be allowed and respondents be directed to execute the sale deed in favour of petitioner. The suit was contested by the respondents. It was alleged on behalf of respondent No. 1 that prior to agreement dated 22-6-07, which was in favour of petitioner, the respondent No. 1 entered into an agreement to sale the suit property to the respondent No. 2, vide agreement dated 10-2-07 and possession was also handed over to the respondent No. 2. It was alleged that in compliance of agreement dated 10-2-07 sale deed was also executed by respondent No. 1 in favour of respondent No. 2 on 3-8-07. It was prayed that the suit be dismissed. After framing of issues and recording of evidence at the stage of evidence of the respondents an attempt was made to get the agreement dated 10-2-07 exhibited. At that stage an application was filed by the petitioner under Section 151, CPC, wherein it was prayed that the agreement dated 10-2-07 is not properly stamped, therefore, the same cannot be exhibited. The application was opposed by the respondents. After hearing the parties, learned Court below dismissed the application, hence this petition.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner argued at length and submits that since the agreement dated 10-2-07 is not properly stamped as per Article 5(e)(i) of Schedule 1-A of Indian Stamp Act, therefore, the learned Court below was not justified in dismissing the application filed by petitioner. Article 5(e)(i) of Schedule 1-A of Indian Stamp Act reads as under which has came in force w.e.f. 13-8-02:--

(3.) Learned Counsel placed reliance on a decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Avinash Kumar Chauhan Vs. Vijay Krishna Mishra, 2009 3 MPHT 6 , wherein Hon'ble Apex Court held that Section 35 of the Stamp Act categorically provides that a document not duly stamped shall not be admitted for any purpose whatsoever. It is further observed by the Hon'ble Apex Court that the word "for any purpose", if given their natural meaning, as they should, would include a collateral purpose as well. It is submitted that in view of this, petition filed by the petitioner be allowed and impugned order passed by the learned Court below be set aside.