agreement is on stamp paper of Rs.10/- and as on the date of executing the agreement, Article 5(e)(i) of the 1957 Act was not in force and as on that said date required duty is paid on agreement dated 26.03.1993. Further, it is submitted that as on the date of sale agreement dated 26.03.19963, there was no requirement to pay stamp duty under Article 20 of the 1957 Act on the agreement as if it is a conveyance, where possession is handed over. Further, learned counsel would submit the trial Court also fell into error in treating the shara as renewal agreement and directing the petitioner/plaintiff to pay stamp duty on the sale consideration. In fact, learned counsel would submit that possession is not handed under shara and taking the Court through the contents of the shara agreement, would submit that it is not a renewal agreement. He further submits that the sale consideration was enhanced to Rs.95,000/- in earlier shara dated 20.11.1995. Therefore, learned counsel would submit that the trial Court could not have directed the petitioner/plaintiff to pay stamp duty on enhanced sale
