‘The receipt of balance payment of a registered sale deed does not require registration for admission as evidence in the Court,’ Read Judgment

The Andhra Pradesh High Court, held that once this Court has directed to collect the stamp duty and penalty over the said receipt, the said document can be marked as evidence and the orders passed by this Court in the earlier rounds of litigation attained finality.

This ruling came while dismissing a petition challenging the order dated 29.07.2019 passed in an interim application in a suit before the Additional Senior Civil Judge.

Brief Facts:

The petitioner had filed suit for cancellation of GPA cum agreement of sale dated 28.01.2009 registered as document and consequently to declare four sale deeds dated 16.03.2013 executed by the 2nd defendant in favor of the defendant Nos.3 to 6 and for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the possession of plaint schedule property. The 2nd respondent had paid the balance sale consideration of Rs.5,000/- to the petitioner who executed a receipt on the same date and possession of the property was also delivered. When the respondents sought to mark the receipt evidencing the delivery of possession of the property, the petitioner raised an objection, which was dismissed. Questioning the said order the petitioner/plaintiff preferred a revision petition. The said revision was disposed of by order dated 27.11.2015 upholding the order passed by the trial Court. Hence, the present petition.

Contentions of the Petitioner:

The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that though objection was taken with regard to the admissibility of the receipt dated 25.02.2009 for want of registration is incurable, the trial Court did not consider the same and was pleased to overrule the objection.

Observations of the Court:

The Court noted that once this Court has directed to collect the stamp duty and penalty over the said receipt, the said document can be marked as evidence and the orders passed by this Court in the earlier rounds of litigation attained finality.

The Court observed that the agreement of sale cum GPA dated 28.01.2009 was also registered and under the receipt dated 25.02.2009, the balance sale consideration was only paid. In view of the recitals in the agreement of sale cum GPA coupled with the receipt, the objection raised by the petitioner deserves no consideration. 

The decision of the Court:

The Andhra Pradesh High Court, dismissing the petition, held that this Court does not find any illegality in the order passed by the trial Court.

Case Title: Girish P. Rupani v Bandi Venkata Rao & Ors.

Coram: Hon’ble Justice T.C.D. Sekhar

Case no.: CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 2237/2019

Advocate for the Petitioner: Mr. V V Ravi Prasad

Advocate for the Respondents: Mr. Somu Krishna Murthy