MANAK LAL Vs. SMT. SHOBHA RANKAWAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner-plaintiff has filed this writ petition to challenge impugned order dated 27.11.2013 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge No.2, Jodhpur Metropolitan (for short, 'learned Court below'), whereby learned Court below, while accepting application of the respondent-defendant under Sections 35 and 39 of the Rajasthan Stamp Act, 1998 (for short, 'Act of 1998'), has recorded a finding that the document in the nature of agreement to sale is not properly stamped, therefore, the same cannot be exhibited & accepted in evidence and be kept in 'D' part of the file.

(2.) The facts necessary and germane to the matter are that petitioner-plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance of contract and perpetual injunction against the respondent-defendant. The suit filed by the petitioner was based on alleged agreement to sale dated 18.06.2009 on 100/- rupees stamp. On behalf of respondent, return statement was filed, and thereafter, learned Court below framed issues. When the evidence of the petitioner-plaintiff was going on, an application under Sections 35 and 39 of the Act of 1998 was filed by respondent-defendant raising the objection that the alleged agreement to sale is not properly stamped, and therefore, it is inadmissible in evidence. The application was contested by the petitioner-plaintiff. After hearing rival submissions, learned Court below passed the impugned order.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order and also examined Chapter IV of the Act of 1998.