Pasham Prudhavi Raj, Hyd And 6 Others v. K. Padma, Hyd And 9 Others

THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE B. SIVA SANKARA RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.2244 OF 2017 ORDER:

Heard both sides.

In fact law is fairly settled by the expression of the Apex Court in Chilakuri Gangulappa v. Revenue Divisional Officer, Madanapalle and another1 that even after the Court impounded by deciding the nature of the document with a direction to pay the stamp duty with 10 times penalty, the party, who wants to rely on the document still got an option in making a request to refer the document to the District Registrar for impounding. In such a case, the Court has no option but for refer. Refusal by the trial Court to refer the document is unsustainable and it is premature at this stage to go into as to the even on payment of stamp duty from want of registration whether it can be admitted or not and whether there is any collateral purpose or not etc., Therefore, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed setting aside the Order dt. 17.03.2017 in I.

A.No.221 of 2017 in O.S.No.04 of 2008 passed by IX Additional Chief Jude, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, directing the trial Court to refer the document to the District Registrar, by left open after impounding by the District Registrar, to decide while exhibiting whether any registration is required and if so for any collateral purpose to be admitted.

1 AIR 2001 SC 1321

Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending if any, shall stand closed.

_______________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE B. SIVA SANKARA RAO Dt. 29.11.2017 eha

THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE B. SIVA SANKARA RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.2244 OF 2017 Dt. 29.11.2017 eha