SUGAN CHAND Vs. ABDUL AZIZ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been filed by the petitioner-defendant, challenging the order dated 27.07.2015 passed by the Additional District Judge, Karauli (hereinafter referred to as "the trial court "), whereby the trial court has dismissed the application of the petitioner under Section 35 of the Stamps Act read with Section 17 (2) of the Registration Act for not admitting the agreement to sell dated 23.10.2009 filed by the respondent-plaintiff.

(2.) After having heard the learned counsels for the parties, it appears that the respondent-plaintiff had sought to produce on record the agreement dated 23.10.2009 which was neither registered under the provisions contained in the Registration Act nor was duly stamped as required under the Stamps Act. It is needless to say that in view of Section 35 of the Stamps Act, any document which is required to be stamped under the Stamps Act, has not been duly stamped, cannot be admitted in evidence. A beneficial reference of the decision of this Court in case of Jagdish Prasad & Ors. v. Parshu Ram & Anr., 2013 (1) WLC (Raj.) 696 be made in this regard. The learned counsel for the respondent states that the respondent shall pay deficit stamp duty as required under the Stamps Act. He may do so as required under the said Act.

(3.) In view of the above, the impugned order dated 27.07.2015 deserves to be set aside, and is accordingly set-aside. The writ petition stands allowed accordingly. By this order, the stay application and other pending application if any also stand disposed of. Petition allowed-Impugned order set aside.