SUBRATA MUKHERJEE Vs. SUMATI KUMAR SETHIA & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In a suit for specific performance of contract based on an agreement, the plaintiff as PW 1 had filed in the Court below his affidavit-in-chief. This agreement along with other documents, were marked exhibits by the Court below. The said document was marked as exhibit 2. At the time of receiving the said document in evidence, the defendants did not raise any objection. Subsequently, the defendants had taken out an application alleging that the said agreement for sale was executed upon a stamp paper of Rs. 10/- and the plaintiff had not paid the requisite stamp duty. The defendants prayed for an order impounding the said agreement before proceeding with the Suit any further.

(2.) The plaintiffs filed their written objection wherein a very specific point was taken out that at the time of receiving the said agreement for sale in evidence, the defendants did not raise any objection and the defendants have also cross-examined the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs had further contended that the defendants has neither filed any objection in executing the same nor did raise any oral objection at the time of evidence when the said document was marked as an exhibit.

(3.) This application came up for hearing before the learned Trial Judge and the learned Trial Judge after considering the respective cases had rejected the said application on contest. Aggrieved by the order, the defendants have come up with an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 4. After hearing Mr. Purnasis Ray, the learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner and after going through the records, I do not find any infirmity with the order passed by the learned Trial Judge. The learned Trial Judge had rightly relied on the case of Shyamal Kumar Ray v. Sushil Kumar Agarwal reported in AIR 2007 SC 637 . There also an agreement was exhibited without any objection on the part of the appellants in that appeal. At the time of argument, a prayer was made and an application was filed by the appellants for sending the documents to the Collector for impounding the same in terms of Section 38 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899.