Bombay High Court
Bhudha Bhila Pardhi vs Hausabai Magan Pardhi on 22 December, 2016
Bench: T.V. Nalawade
WP No. 4682/15 & Ors.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY
APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 4682 OF 2015
Shri. Bhudha Bhila Pardhi,
Age 40 years, Occu. Agriculture
At Post Pardhi Wada, Sindkheda,
Tal. Shindkheda, Dist. Dhule. ....Petitioner.
Versus
Hausabai Magan Pardhi,
Age 72 years, Occu. Agriculture,
Through - Magan Nhanku Pawar (Pardhi),
At Post Mora Bhagal, Hanuman Tekdi,
Jitendra Nagar, House No. 85, Rander,
Surat, (Gujrat). ....Respondent.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 4683 OF 2015
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10672 OF 2015
Manishabai Budha Pardhi,
Age 35 years, Occu. Farmer,
At Post Pardhi Wada, Sindkheda,
Tal. Shindkheda, Dist. Dhule. ....Petitioner.
Versus
Magan Nhanu Pardhi,
Age 70 years, Occu. Farmer,
At Post Mora Bhagal, Hanuman Tekdi,
Jitendra Nagar, House No. 85, Rander,
Surat, (Gujrat). ....Respondent.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 4817 OF 2015
Bebibai Budha Pardhi,
Age 40 years, Occu. Agriculture,
::: Uploaded on - 23/12/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 24/12/2016 01:13:03 :::
WP No. 4682/15 & Ors.
2
At Post Pardhi Wada, Sindkheda,
Tal. Shindkheda, Dist. Dhule. ....Petitioner.
Versus
Raju Magan Pardhi,
Age 46 years, Occu. Farmer,
At Post Mora Bhagal, Hanuman Tekdi,
Jitendra Nagar, House No. 85, Rander,
Surat, (Gujrat). ....Respondent.
Mr. M.V. Bhamre, Advocate for petitioners.
Mr. S.P. Shah, Advocate for respondents.
ig CORAM : T.V. NALAWADE, J.
DATED : 22nd December, 2016.
ORAL JUDGMENT :
1) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent,
heard both the sides for final disposal.
2) In the three suits, the applications were filed by
plaintiff for impounding of the documents like agreement written
on stamp paper of Rs.100/- denomination and the possession
receipt. Readiness was shown by the plaintiff to pay the stamp
duty and penalty.
3) The learned Judge of the Trial Court has rejected the
applications by holding that such step was not taken for about
three years. Other reason is given that in view of the provision of
WP No. 4682/15 & Ors.
section 47 of Indian Registration Act, the agreement can be
considered for collateral purpose when the suit is filed for relief
of specific performance of contract.
4) The reasoning given by the Trial Court shows that the
Court has not touched the provisions of Maharashtra Stamp Act,
1958. Both the sides took this Court through the provisions of
sections 33 to 37 of the said Act. These provisions show that it is
the duty of the Court to see that the document on which proper
stamp duty is not paid, is impounded and further procedure is
followed. It appears that in the present matters, there is some
misconception. In the agreement which was written on stamp
paper, the consideration amount was shown, but separate
possession receipts were prepared to avoid the payment of
stamp duty and also registration. In view of these circumstances,
this Court holds that the Trial Court has committed error in view
of provision of section 34 of the aforesaid Act. The Trial Court
ought to have impounded the documents. The Trial Court is to
follow the procedure laid down for recovery of stamp duty and
penalty.
5) The learned counsel for respondents placed reliance
on two cases of this Court reported as 2005(1) ALL MR 335
WP No. 4682/15 & Ors.
[M/s. Conwood Agencies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Namdeo Pandurang
Panchal & Anr.] and the case bearing W.P. No. 1175/2010
dated 30th June 2010 [Sangeeta Rajendra Wani Vs.
Bhaskar Gangadhar Shinde and Anr.] to show the procedure.
6) In the result, the petitions are partly allowed. The
applications filed by the plaintiffs for impounding aforesaid two
documents in each case are allowed to that extent. The
aforesaid observations in respect of the documents are for the
present purpose only. Civil Application is also disposed of.
Rule is made absolute in aforesaid terms.
[ T.V. NALAWADE, J. ]
ssc/
