Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.29 seconds)
Documents citing Sukhdev Singh vs Baxis Singh And Anr. on 24 January, 2006

Vinod Kumar Sanadhya vs Surendra Mohan on 6 August, 2013

Mr. Suresh Shrimali, learned counsel for the respondent, in support of his contentions has also placed reliance on a coordinate Bench decision of this Court in case of Sukhdev Singh Vs. Baxis Singh & Anr. [2006 (2) RDD 732 (Raj.)] wherein while considering the import of Sections 17 & 49 of the Registration Act and Section 35 of the of the Stamp Law (Adoption) Act 1952, the Court has held that a document which is insufficiently stamped and not registered is inadmissible in evidence even for collateral purposes. The Court made following observations in Para 29 & 30 of the verdict:
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur Cites 16 - Cited by 0 - P K Lohra - Full Document

Shyoraj vs Addi District Judge And Ors on 7 August, 2012

5. However, the learned counsel Mr. S. Gaharana for the respondents relying upon the judgments of this court in case of Smt. Keshar Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. 1997(1) WLC (Raj.), 514 and in the case of Sukhdev Singh Vs. Baxis Singh & Anr. 2006(2) RLW, 1036 and on th judgment of Gujarat High Court in the case of John Mithalal Desai Vs. Dineshbhai Vora 1998(2) Civil Court Cases, 339 (Gujarat) submitted that an unregistered agreement for sell would not be admissible in evidence, and that insufficiently stamped document could be impounded by the court and the party could be directed to pay the stamp duty and the penalty amount under the said Act.
Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - B M Trivedi - Full Document

Nathu Lal Alias Nathya S/O Shri Chatra Ji vs Anandi Lal S/O Shri Ramgopal on 26 July, 2023

Learned counsel for the defendant has placed reliance upon the following judgments :- (1) Arockia Prakash Vs. Rangasamy reported in 2007 (4) CivCC 23; (2) Syeda Rahimunnisa Vs. Malan Bi (Dead) by LRs & Anr. reported in 2016 AIR (SC) 4653; (3) Shanthaveerappa Vs. K. N. Janardhanachari reported in 2006 (13) R.C.R. (Civil) 256; (4) Ahmmadsahab Abdul Milla Vs. Bibijan & Ors. reported in 2009 (5) SCC 462; (5) K. S. Vidyanadam Vs. Varavan reported in 1997 (3) SCC 1 and (6) Sukhdev Singh Vs. Baxis Singh reported in 2006 (2) Raj LW 1036.
Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - N S Dhaddha - Full Document

Smt. Pushpa Agarwal And Ors. vs Shiv Shankar Suwalka And Anr. on 10 January, 2008

4. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the appellants that the document agreement to sale alleged to have been executed on non-judicial stamp of Rs. 100/-, whereas the Rajasthan Stamps Law provides that the stamp duty @ 3% on the value determined is required to be paid and unless the requisite stamp duty is paid, the document is not admissible in evidence. He also relied on the judgment of this Court in Sukhdev Singh v. Baxis Singh and Anr. 2006(2) RLW 1036.
Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 2 - Cited by 1 - H R Panwar - Full Document
1