SMT. AMARI Vs. SUKHRAJ GAUR & ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved against order dated 10.03.2016 passed by the trial court, whereby, the application filed by the petitioner under Sec. 65 of the Evidence Act, 1872 ('the Act') has been rejected on the ground that the a copy of the document in question is insufficiently stamped and, therefore, the same cannot be impounded for payment of the requisite stamp duty.

(2.) It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the trial court was not justified in coming to the conclusion that the document was not admissible in evidence, inasmuch as, the document in question is a receipt only and the same bears requisite stamp duty and, therefore, the order impugned deserves to be quashed and set aside.

(3.) Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that a bare look at the document reveals that the document in question is an agreement, which is required to bear stamp duty in terms of Art. 5(c) of the Schedule attached to the Stamp Act. However, the same only bears a Rs. l revenue stamp. Further, as the document is a copy and it is insufficiently stamped, the trial court was justified in rejecting the application as the document could not have been impounded.