HANUMAN PRASAD Vs. RAMSWAROOP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved by order dtd. 6/10/2015 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Sawaimadhopur in Civil Suit No.52/2007 (23/2006), whereby the application filed by the plaintiff/petitioner u/s 33, 35, 37 and 38 of the Rajasthan Stamp Act, 1998 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 1998") was dismissed and further being aggrieved by order dtd. 30/5/2014, whereby the documents exhibit dtd. 26/7/1971 being unstamped and unregistered, were refused to be marked as exhibits. Hence,the present writ petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) Facts of the case are that the plaintiff/petitioner filed a suit for declaration, permanent injunction and cancellation of sale deed. During course of plaintiff's evidence, plaintiff filed an application under Sec. 33, 35, 37 and 38 of the Act for impounding the documents dtd. 26/7/1971 and also requested for marking the same as exhibits. Vide impugned orders dtd. 30/5/2014 and 6/10/2015, the said applications were dismissed.

(3.) It is submitted by Mr. Nitin Jain, counsel representing the petitioner that the learned trial court has committed error by refusing to take on record document dtd. 26/7/1971 as the same was not duly stamped and registered. Qua the deficit of registration, his submission was that by virtue of Sec. 49 of the Registration Act, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 1908"), more particularly its proviso, his case is covered under exception, as the document in question pertains to collateral transaction. In support of his claim, he relied upon judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in S. Kaladevi vs. V.R. Somasundaram and Ors. reported in (2010) 5 SCC 401. He emphasized on para-12 of the said judgment, which is reproduced as under :-