OMPRAKASH Vs. GANESH SHANKAR MEHTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed against the order dated 4.12.2011 passed by Second Civil Judge Class-II Sheopur, District Sheopur in Civil Suit No. 16-A/2011 by which the application filed by the petitioner under Section 33 of the Stamp Act, 1899 has been rejected.

(2.) It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the Trial Court has come to a conclusion that considering the contents of the document, it does not appear to be an agreement but it is a mortgage deed and, therefore, it is required to be registered. As the instrument is not a registered document, therefore, there is no question for sending the same to Collector (Stamps). Since the mortgage deed is unregistered document, therefore, it is not admissible in evidence. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that it is true that an unregistered mortgage deed is not admissible in evidence but the same can be read for collateral purposes and, therefore, the Claims Tribunal committed a material illegality by holding the instrument as not admissible even for collateral purposes. To buttress his contentions, the counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the order passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Narendra Prasad Soni v. Manjulata reported in 2002 (1) MPWN 14.

(3.) It is fairly conceded by the counsel for the petitioner that earlier by order dated 24.8.2012 this Court had granted interim stay of the further proceedings but in the light of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. v. Central Bureau of Investigation in Criminal Appeal Nos. 1375-1376 of 2013, trial has reached to the stage of defence evidence.