Possession delivered pursuant to an agreement of sale falls within the ambit of Explanation to Article 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act, in line with Section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act.

( 1 ) THIS revision is filed against the order passed in Check Slip No. 27 of 1992 in o. S. No. 28/91 on the file of the Sub-Judge, Rajam. The Court-fee Examiner while inspecting the Court pointed out that in para 3 of the plaint it is stated by the plaintiff that the defendant received major portion of the consideration and that the plaintiff was put in possession of the plaint schedule house in the month of April, 1990 and the plaintiff is paying house-tax etc. Therefore, in his opinion the agreement is chargeable as sale by virtue of Explanation to Article 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act as amended in the year 1986. This check slip petition was upheld by the lower Court. Aggrieved by the said order, the present revision is filed.

( 2 ) THE learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the instrument itself is dated 30-3-1989 and the possession was given in April, 1990. Possession was not given in pursuance of the said agreement. Therefore, explanation to Article 47-A does not apply.

( 3 ) I am unable to agree with his contention. The document is dated 30-3-1989. Admittedly, the plaintiff is in possession in pursuance of the said agreement, though possession was given at a later date, i. e. , in April, 1990. This certainly evidences the delivery of possession of the property agreed to be sold and comes within the ambit of Explanation to Article 47-A of Schedule I-A of the stamp Act as amended. In this view, I am fortified by a judgment of this Court in Mekapothula Linga Reddy vs. Durgempudi Gangi Reddy wherein it was held by my learned brother Sri S. Dasaradha Rama Reddy,}. as follows:"as can be seen from Section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act,delivery of possession need not be immediate and buyer is given the right when once possession is given pursuant to the agreement of sale. As the object of introduction of Explanation to Article 47-A and Proviso to Article 20 is to plug loopnoles in evasion of Stamp duty by persons invoking the theory of part performance under Section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act, the word possession has to be interpreted as including possession pursuant to the agreement of sale and not restricted to possession that must immediately follow the execution of the agreement. Otherwise, the buyer can easily circumvent the law and evade the duty by entering into agreement to day and obtaining possession couple of days thereafter, at the same time claiming benefit of Section 53-A of Transfer of Property Act it is obvious that such interpretation has to be avoided. The contention of sri P. S. Narayana, learned counsel for the petitioner, that there was no fresh agreement on 30-5-1990 when possession was delivered to attract explanation is not correct On 30-5-1990, when possession was delivered pursuant to the agreement of sale, there is, in the eye of law, deemed to be a new instrument attracting Explanation to Article 47-A. "

( 4 ) THE learned Judge considered the Full Bench Judgment of the Madras high Court in Board of Revenue vs. Samarazu and also the judgment of this Court in T. Gurappa vs. Naidu Ramana Reddy to come to the above conclusion. I am also of the same view. Therefore Check Slip and the order of the lower Court are upheld. There are no merits in the revision and it is accordingly dismissed. No costs.