Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

6.Aggrieved by that, the present revision petition is filed on the ground that there is no prohibition under Section 49 of the Registration Act to receive the unregistered document in evidence for collateral purpose, provided, it is duly stamped or duty and penalty paid under Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act. The defendants want to rely upon the said unregistered and inadequately stamped document for collateral purpose to establish the nature of their possession over the suit property. According to the revision petitioners, to establish that their possession is neither illegal nor unauthorised, admission of this document into evidence is essential. The petitioners while ready to pay the deficit stamp duty and penalty, there is no legal impediment for admission of the said document into evidence. The refusal to admit the same will highly prejudice the case of the defendants.

7.Per contra, the counsel for the respondent/plaintiff submitted that it is now well settled by a catena of judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Court that no unregistered document which creates or extinguishes title over the immovable property worth more than Rs.100/- can be admitted in evidence even for collateral purpose if it is inadequately stamped. Further, if the document is not adequately stamped as per the Indian Stamp Act, by reason of statutory interdiction, no transfer is permissible under the said deed of conveyance.

''The main question, as we have already noted, is the question of continuous possession of the plaintiffs over the suit lands. The sale deed dated 9-5-1931 by Fakir Chand, father of the defendants in favour of Tola Singh, the predecessor-in-interest of the plaintiffs, is an admitted document in the sense its execution is not in dispute. The only defence set up against the said document is that it is unstamped and unregistered and therefore it cannot convey title to the land in favour of the plaintiffs. Under the law a sale deed is required to be properly stamped and registered before it can convey title to the vendee. However, legal position is clear law that a document like the sale deed in the present case, even though not admissible in evidence, can be looked into for collateral purposes. In the present case the collateral purpose to be seen is the nature of possession of the plaintiffs over the suit lands. The sale deed in question at least shows that initial possession of the plaintiffs over the suit land was not illegal or unauthorised.''

9.In the present case, the nature of possession of the plaintiff over the suit property is not questioned. The alleged unregistered sale deed which conveys transfer of title is not permissible in law and the supposed collateral purpose is not available for the defendants for dual reason. Firstly, it is unregistered document and secondly, it is not adequately stamped. Under Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act, a document which is not adequately stamped is not admissible in evidence for any purpose whatsoever, provided, the deficit stamp duty and penalty is collected as per the provisions of the said Act. In this case, there is no collateral purpose involved for admitting the unregistered sale deed. Hence, necessity to admit the document after collecting the necessary duty and penalty does not arise.