Relinquishment deeds by co-owners do not automatically constitute gift deeds requiring higher stamp duty; evidentiary context is critical for determination.

JUDGMENT :

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.

1. The present Appeal has been filed, assailing the correctness of an interlocutory order passed on 01.04.2024 [hereinafter referred to as ‘Impugned Order’], whereby the learned Single Judge has ordered impounding of the relinquishment deed, executed by a mother in favour of her son, on account of deficient stamp duty by treating it as a gift deed.

2. The present dispute arises from the property bearing No. E9/10, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi – 110057 [hereinafter referred to as ‘suit property’]. A perpetual Sub-lease Deed, dated 02.01.1970, of the suit property, was executed in favour of Late Sh. V.K. Gupta and Late Smt. Saroj K. Gupta. Thereafter, on the unfortunate demise of Late Sh. V.K. Gupta, his share in the suit property was mutated in favour of Late Smt. Saroj K. Gupta (Respondent/Defendant No. 3 therein), Sh. Uday K. Gupta (Respondent/Defendant No. 2 therein), Late Sh. Sanjay Kumar (Plaintiff’s late husband) and Late Sh. Ajay Kumar (Respondent/Defendant No. 1 therein).

3. Late Smt. Saroj K. Gupta, vide the registered Relinquishment Deed, relinquished her 12.5% share in the suit property in favour of her son, Late Sh. Sanjay Kumar. Following the execution of this Relinquishment Deed, Late Sh. Sanjay Kumar held a 25% share in the suit property. Thereafter, Late Sh. Sanjay Kumar, before his unfortunate demise on 25.08.2013, executed a registered will dated 23.08.2013, in favour of his wife, Smt. Anita Kumar (Appellant/Plaintiff therein).

4. It is alleged that after the death of the husband of the Plaintiff, the Defendant Nos. 1 & 2, along with the other relatives of the Defendants, repeatedly tried to dispossess the Plaintiff and her children from their lawful possession of the ground floor in the suit property. Consequently, the Appellant/Plaintiff therein filed a civil suit, i.e., CS(OS) No. 2104/2013, seeking partition and injunctions related to the suit property. This Court vide its order dated 06.11.2013, restrained the Respondents/Defendants from disturbing the possession of the Appellant/Plaintiff on the ground floor of the suit property.

5. After a period of nearly 10 years from the date of the institution of suit, Respondents/Defendants therein filed an application, I.A. No. 21245/2023, under Sections 33 , 35, and 38 of the Indian STAMP ACT , 1899, read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, [CPC] seeking examination and impounding of the Relinquishment Deed on the account of same being in the nature of a gift and being an insufficiently stamped document.

6. It is the Defendants’/Applicants’ case that the said Relinquishment Deed is in the nature of a gift deed couched as a relinquishment deed in order to avoid payment of appropriate stamp duty as a gift.

7. It is Plaintiff’s case that the Defendants objected to the Relinquishment Deed on the alleged ground of the same being in nature of a gift deed and that it was insufficiently stamped, about 10 years after the Relinquishment Deed had been admitted into evidence; and that after admission/denial of the Relinquishment Deed had been concluded, the Defendants could not renege on their position.

8. Learned Single Judge has allowed the application, directing the impounding of the document, on the following grounds:

i. The evidence in the present case has not yet been recorded. Therefore, merely admitting the execution of the document at the stage of admission and denial cannot prevent the defendants from raising the issue of admissibility at