DANA RAM Vs. PARASMAL JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners aggrieved against the orders dated 5.8.2015 passed by the Trial Court in various suits, whereby on applications filed by the petitioners under sections 35 and 39 of the Rajasthan Stamp Act, 1998 ('the Act of 1998'), the Court came to the conclusion that the document in question appears to be a memorandum of family settlement and as the document is dated 5.9.1994 and the Act of 1998 came into force on 27.5.2004, which is not retrospective, rejected the application filed by the petitioner.

(2.) The respondent plaintiff filed a suit for eviction based on termination of tenancy under section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (The Act of 1882). It was, inter alia, indicated that the property was in the tenancy of the defendant for over 40 years and the defendant was depositing the rent in a joint account of petitioner along with his brothers. Where after it was, inter alia, averred in the plaint that in the partition of the family property, the shop in question came in the share of the respondent plaintiff and based on the said averments eviction was sought.

(3.) On an application filed by the petitioner under Order 11, Rule 12 , C.P.C., the document of family settlement was produced by the respondent -plaintiff where after the petitioner filed an application under sections 35 and 39 of the Act of 1998, inter alia, indicating that the document was insufficiently stamped, allegations were also made that the document also required registration.