Back
TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO
VSR Plantations, Srikakulam – Appellant
Versus
District Registrar, Vizianagaram – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The present civil revision petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, assailing the order dated 02.04.2024 in IA No.34 of 2024 in CMA No.1 of 2021 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Vizianagaram.
2. The revision petitioner herein filed CMA No.1 of 2021 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Vizianagaram, aggrieved by the order dated 12.03.2021 in C.No.G4/561/2020, dated 12.03.2021, passed by the District Registrar of Assurances and Collector, Vizianagaram, under Section 47 of the Indian STAMP ACT , 1899.
3. Pending the said C.M.A., the respondents herein, i.e., the District Registrar, Office of the District Registrar, Santha Pet, Vizianagaram, and the Joint Sub-Registrar, Cheepurupalli, Vizianagaram District, filed IA No.34 of 2024 in CMA No.1 of 2021 to condone the delay in filing the documents and to grant leave to file and receive the additional documents and mark them as exhibits on behalf of the respondents, as they are essential for fixing the market value of the property.
4. The facts of the case are that: The petitioner herein has submitted the document styled as sale deed dated 19.06.2020 for registration and the Sub-Registrar denied to
Appellate courts should consider applications for additional evidence alongside the appeal to avoid injustice and ensure effective judgment as per Order 41 Rule 27 C.P.C.
Additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC must be considered at the final hearing of an appeal, not prior.
The market value of a property should be assessed based on ground reality, and the proper procedure must be followed in determining the market value.
The registering authority cannot re-evaluate paid stamp duty on agricultural land based on intended future use, reaffirming the original market value at the time of purchase.
Only original documents can be validated under the Indian Stamp Act; photocopies cannot be validated or impounded, irrespective of secondary evidence provisions.
The court ruled that minor procedural errors, such as delayed deposit of non-judicial stamps, should not invalidate an auction sale, especially when substantial compliance is evident.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
