Order VII Rule 14, Order XII Rule 2 and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, ‘CPC’) and Section 49 of the Registration Act, 1908= The defendant in the said suit fled I.A.No.653 of 2012 under Order VII Rule 14, Order XII Rule 2 and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, ‘CPC’) and Section 49 of the Registration Act, 1908 praying to admit the sale deeds and other unregistered documents of sale for collateral purpose and to mark the same. The said petition was dismissed on the ground that Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 is a bar for admitting those documents.= in view of the bar Under Section 35 of the Stamp Act, 1899, which provides that any document cannot be received as evidence for any other purpose, unless the stamp duty and penalty is paid.

CRP 941 / 2013

CRPSR 5248 / 2013

PETITIONER RESPONDENT K. S.BABU @ SEETHAKAYALA BABU   VS SADHIKA BASHA & 7 OTHERS PET.ADV. : SIDDHIVARDHANA RESP.ADV. :  SUBJECT: ARTICLE 227 DISTRICT:  CHITTOOR

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU

CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.941 of 2013

O R D E R:-

This Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is filed challenging the order, dated 09.10.2012, passed in I.A.No.653 of 2012 in O.S.No.138 of 2006 on the file of the I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Chittoor.

2.      The petitioner herein is the defendant and respondents herein are the plaintiffs in O.S.No.138 of 2006.  For better appreciation of facts, the parties are hereinafter referred to, as they are arrayed before the trial Court

3.      The defendant in the said suit fled I.A.No.653 of 2012 under Order VII Rule 14, Order XII Rule 2 and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, ‘CPC’) and Section 49 of the Registration Act, 1908 praying to admit the sale deeds and other unregistered documents of sale for collateral purpose and to mark the same.  The said petition was dismissed on the ground that Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 is a bar for admitting those documents. Challenging the same, the present application is filed. 

4.      The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that under the proviso of Section 49 of Registration Act, 1908, the document can be used for collateral purpose.  But the said contention cannot be accepted in view of the bar Under Section 35 of the Stamp Act, 1899, which provides that any document cannot be received as evidence for any other purpose, unless the stamp duty and penalty is paid.  Therefore, the order under challenge needs no interference by this Court and the Civil Revision petition is devoid of merits. 

5.      Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed.   However, this order will not preclude the petitioner from presenting those documents before the Court below for marking after paying necessary stamp duty and penalty.  No costs.  Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the C.R.P. shall stand closed.

______________________

JUSTICE K.C.BHANU

15^th March 2013

sr/pn

                        HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.941 of 2013

 

 

Dated:15.03.2013

sr/pn