Property dispute
5 years ago
Sir I have a property rented to a cloth seller on which the renter of the shop has given money to my grandfather on behalf of purchasing the property but my grandfather has done agreement only on stamp paper he has not yet done the register of the property now my grandfather is no more and the renter of the shop has given me a notice to appear in a court till 28 may what should I do sir guide me
A.Just appear in the Court through your local lawyer and say that unregistered is not valid unless 10 times of stamp duty is paid as per Stamp Act. Law is as follows.
AGREEMENT NO POSSESSI0N NO STAMP DUTY EVEN THERE IS RECITAL OF POSSESSION NO COURT FEE IF POSSESSION WAS NOT DELIVERED
wherever the agreement holder is not in possession of the property under agreement of sale, even though there is a recital in the agreement as to delivery of possession, he need not pay proper stamp duty as required. It shall be treated as a simple agreement of sale falling outside the scope of Explanation I to Article 47-A of Schedule I of the Indian Stamp Act.
posted 26 Mar 2011, 06:55 by advocatemmmohan Mandagaddi murali mohan
"followed by or evidencing delivery of possession". These
expressions cannot be read in isolation and one has to find the true meaning by
reading the entire Explanation and more so in conjunction with the earlier
expression i.e., "agreement". Even if these two expressions are looked
independently, it means an agreement to sell followed by delivery of possession
and an agreement to sell evidencing delivery of possession. In the first case,
i.e., "followed by delivery", possession cannot be disjuncted from the basic
source i.e., agreement to sell. Therefore, the expression followed by delivery
of possession should have a direct nexus to the agreement and should be read in
juxtaposition to the word 'agreement' and it cannot be independent or outside
the agreement. Therefore, the delivery of possession should follow the agreement
i.e., through the agreement. It takes in its sweep the recital in the agreement
itself that delivery of possession is being handed over. It will also cover
cases of delivery of possession contemporaneous with the execution of agreement,
even if there is no specific recital in the agreement. In other words, the
delivery of possession should be intimately and inextricably connected with the
agreement. And in the second type, i.e., agreements evidencing delivery of
possession, if the document contains evidence of delivery of possession by a
recital in that behalf, that is sufficient. Such delivery of possession can be
prior to the date of agreement and need not be under the agreement. If the
Agreement records the fact that the possession was delivered earlier and such
recital serves as evidence of delivery of possession, though prior to the
Agreement, it falls under the second limb. Therefore, on a proper interpretation
of the said expressions, it would follow that an agreement containing specific
recital of delivery of possession or indicating delivery of possession even in
the past is liable for stamp duty as a 'sale' under the said Explanation.
wherever the agreement holder is not
in possession of the property under agreement of sale, even though there is a
recital in the agreement as to delivery of possession, he need not pay proper
stamp duty as required. It shall be treated as a simple agreement of sale
falling outside the scope of Explanation I to Article 47-A of Schedule I of the
Indian Stamp Act. Various situations may arise for consideration on this aspect.
The purpose of the Act is to see that a person, who is in physical possession
and enjoyment shall not avoid to pay proper stamp duty as required under
Explanation I to Article 47-A of the Stamp Act. Otherwise, the document shall
not be admissible in evidence as required under Section 35 of the Stamp Act.
For the above reasons, impugned order dated 14.6.2007 passed by the trial Court
is liable to be set aside and is accordingly set aside and the document -
agreement of sale - is ordered to be admitted in evidence.
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU
Civil Revision Petition No. 3337 of 2007
31-08-2010
B. Bhaskar Reddy
Bommireddy Pattabhi Rami Reddy (died)
Per L.Rs., and others.
Counsel for petitioner: Sri M. Ravindranath Reddy
Counsel for Respondents: Sri M.V. Suresh Kumar
:ORDER:
AGREEMENT NO POSSESSI0N NO STAMP DUTY EVEN THERE IS RECITAL OF POSSESSION NO COURT FEE IF POSSESSION WAS NOT DELIVERED
wherever the agreement holder is not in possession of the property under agreement of sale, even though there is a recital in the agreement as to delivery of possession, he need not pay proper stamp duty as required. It shall be treated as a simple agreement of sale falling outside the scope of Explanation I to Article 47-A of Schedule I of the Indian Stamp Act.
posted 26 Mar 2011, 06:55 by advocatemmmohan Mandagaddi murali mohan
"followed by or evidencing delivery of possession". These
expressions cannot be read in isolation and one has to find the true meaning by
reading the entire Explanation and more so in conjunction with the earlier
expression i.e., "agreement". Even if these two expressions are looked
independently, it means an agreement to sell followed by delivery of possession
and an agreement to sell evidencing delivery of possession. In the first case,
i.e., "followed by delivery", possession cannot be disjuncted from the basic
source i.e., agreement to sell. Therefore, the expression followed by delivery
of possession should have a direct nexus to the agreement and should be read in
juxtaposition to the word 'agreement' and it cannot be independent or outside
the agreement. Therefore, the delivery of possession should follow the agreement
i.e., through the agreement. It takes in its sweep the recital in the agreement
itself that delivery of possession is being handed over. It will also cover
cases of delivery of possession contemporaneous with the execution of agreement,
even if there is no specific recital in the agreement. In other words, the
delivery of possession should be intimately and inextricably connected with the
agreement. And in the second type, i.e., agreements evidencing delivery of
possession, if the document contains evidence of delivery of possession by a
recital in that behalf, that is sufficient. Such delivery of possession can be
prior to the date of agreement and need not be under the agreement. If the
Agreement records the fact that the possession was delivered earlier and such
recital serves as evidence of delivery of possession, though prior to the
Agreement, it falls under the second limb. Therefore, on a proper interpretation
of the said expressions, it would follow that an agreement containing specific
recital of delivery of possession or indicating delivery of possession even in
the past is liable for stamp duty as a 'sale' under the said Explanation.
wherever the agreement holder is not
in possession of the property under agreement of sale, even though there is a
recital in the agreement as to delivery of possession, he need not pay proper
stamp duty as required. It shall be treated as a simple agreement of sale
falling outside the scope of Explanation I to Article 47-A of Schedule I of the
Indian Stamp Act. Various situations may arise for consideration on this aspect.
The purpose of the Act is to see that a person, who is in physical possession
and enjoyment shall not avoid to pay proper stamp duty as required under
Explanation I to Article 47-A of the Stamp Act. Otherwise, the document shall
not be admissible in evidence as required under Section 35 of the Stamp Act.
For the above reasons, impugned order dated 14.6.2007 passed by the trial Court
is liable to be set aside and is accordingly set aside and the document -
agreement of sale - is ordered to be admitted in evidence.
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU
Civil Revision Petition No. 3337 of 2007
31-08-2010
B. Bhaskar Reddy
Bommireddy Pattabhi Rami Reddy (died)
Per L.Rs., and others.
Counsel for petitioner: Sri M. Ravindranath Reddy
Counsel for Respondents: Sri M.V. Suresh Kumar
:ORDER:
Helpful
Helpful
Share
Read Related Answers
Sale deed mentions that roof has ownership to owner(builder) not flat owner
Dear Client,
as per RERA guidelines Roofs, staircases, elevators, lobbies, fire exits and common entrances of the buildings are broadly categorised as ‘Common Areas and Facilities’ under Section 2(n)...
Property Transfer
Dear sir,
You have to file civil suit to get relief. Without going to civil court you may not get any relief.
Gift deed
Dear sir,
It cannot be registered after the death of donor. But in case of Will it can be registered after the death of bequeather.
Govt drainage department not playing my bill last 2 years
Dear Sir,
You may lodge complaints with concerned authorities and also get issue a legal notice then approach High Court for necessary directions to the concerned Executive Engineer.
Name variation on different documents
Dear Client,
It's essential to ensure that your name is consistent and accurately reflects your identity across all official documents. Inconsistencies in your name may lead to issues in various sit...
Read Blogs on Civil
Civil Lawyers
Find Lawyers by Location
