Dismissed

Mahaveer Prasad and Anr. v. Smt Natti Bai

Rajasthan HC5 Apr 2018CW/6793/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a petition challenging a trial court order admitting duly stamped documents in evidence for a specific performance suit, the High Court rejected the argument. The court held that documents assessed for stamp duty and paid were legally admissible, dismissing the appeal.

What did the court decide?

The petition was dismissed as it was found to be founded on no ground of illegality.

Mahaveer Prasad and Anr. Vs Smt Natti Bai — Specific Performance | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH

¶3

ORDER

¶4

Mahaveer Prasad S/o Shri Ramnarayan, aged about 60 years, B/c Khati, R/o village Sogaria Sahkari Bhawar, near Ganesh Temple, Kota Junction, Kota (Raj.)

¶5

Omprakash S/o Shri Ramnarayan, aged about 54 years, B/c Khati, R/o village Sogaria Sahkari Bhawar, near Ganesh Temple, Kota Junction, Kota (Raj.)

¶6

Smt. Natti Bai W/o Chhotu Lal ji, aged 78 years, B/c Mehar, R/o Gramkheda Rasulpur, Tehsil Ladpura, District Kota (Raj.)

¶7

--- Respondent-plaintiff

¶8

Date of Order: April 05, 2018.

¶9

PRESENT

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SHARMA

¶11

Mr. Ravi Shankar Sharma, for the petitioners.

¶12

BY THE COURT :

¶13

The petitioners-defendants (hereinafter the defendants') have challenged the impugned order dated 14-3-2018 passed by the Additional District Judge Ramganjmandi, District Kota in Civil Suit No.35/2009 dismissing their application under Section 151 CPC read with Section 17 of the Registration Act praying that the documents dated 11-3-1995, 15-5-1995 and 14-4-1996 submitted by the respondent plaintiff (hereafter the plaintiff') not be admitted in evidence for their inadmissibility.

¶14

¶15

The facts of the case are that a suit for specific performance

¶16

and permanent injunction was filed by the plaintiff, in the course of

¶17

proceedings in the suit the plaintiff relied on documents dated 113-1995, 15-5-1995 and 14-4-1996 and sought to have them exhibited in evidence. On objections by the defendants, the trial court vide order dated 20-2-2013 for impounding the documents in issue sent them to the DIG Stamps for being assessed due stamp duty/ penalty, which was assessed and paid. The documents were again filed before the trial court and when sought to be admitted in evidence and exhibited, the defendants moved an application opposing the same. The trial court considering the fact that the documents in question were now duly stamped, has dismissed the defendants' application vide its impugned order dated 14-3-2018. Hence this petition.

¶18

Heard counsel for the defendants and perused the impugned order 14-3-2018 passed by the trial court.

¶19

A perusal of the impugned order evidences that the documents

¶20

in question were duly stamped when they having first impounded, sent to the Collector (Stamps) and assessed to duty which was paid. The documents duly stamped were then returned to the plaintiff and then submitted in court in support of the suit for specific performance. The trial court therefore found no legal bar permitting them to be admitted in evidence and being exhibited. And rightly so.

¶21

¶22

No ground whatsoever has been made out of any illegality in the

¶23

trial court's impugned order dated 14-3-2018.

¶24

No other argument except as recorded above has been raised before the court.

¶25

I find no force in the petition. The same is dismissed.

(Alok Sharma), J.

arn/

All corrections made in the order have been incorporated in the order being emailed.

¶30

Arun Kumar Sharma, Private Secretary.

Mahaveer Prasad and Anr. v. Smt Natti Bai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahaveer Prasad and Anr. v. Smt Natti Bai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ganpat Lal Vs Shri Shreemat Pandey and Anr.

Nanga Singh Vs Shri Shreemat Pandey and Anr.

Tara Chand Vs Shri Shreemat Pandey and Anr.

Ms Green Plus Builders Pvt. Ltd. Vs Smt Reshma Devi

Abdul Wazid Vs Abdul Mazid and Ors.

Rajbala Vs Au Small Finance Bank Ltd. and Anr.