S.P. KURDUKAR, J.:---These two appeals and other connected matters which were heard together raise common question of law under the Bombay Stamp Act, 1958. We heard advocates for parties in all these matters and we propose to dispose of them by this common judgment.

2. The common question of law raised in all these matters is as to whether a consent decree whereunder title to immovable property is conveyed falls under the definition of `conveyance' under section 2(g) of the Bombay Stamp Act, 1958 - hereinafter referred to as "the Act", or an `instrument' under section 2(1) of the Act or such consent decree falls outside the ambit and scope of the definition of `conveyance' or `instrument' under the Act. According to the appellants (State of Maharashtra and Others) consent decree is clearly covered by the definition of "conveyance" under the Act or at any rate an `instrument' falling under the definition of section 2(1) of the Act. According to the respondents 1 and 2 - the writ petitioners, the consent decree does not fall either in the definition of `conveyance' or `instrument' under the Act. This is the main controversy which requires to be considered in these matters.

3. T