Honble SHARMA, J.–In Durga Dan vs. Devi Das (1) this Court (Honble Kan Singh, J. as he then was) propounded as under:

``No right, title or interest in the property could be conveyed by a document if it is not in accord with Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act. In the circumstances the document cannot be constructed to be a sale for the purposes of Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act, but would be only a contract for sale within its meaning.

Placing reliance on the aforesaid authority, the learned trial Court passed the impugned order and rejected the objection raised by the defendant in respect of a document dated July 13, 1987. Hence this revision.

(2). Mr. N.K. Rastogi, learned counsel appearing for the defendants-petitioners (for short the defendants) canvassed that the Court below has not taken into consideration the provisions contained in the Rajasthan Stamp Law (Adaptation) (Amendment) Act, 1989 (for short the Act). The document in question ought to have been construed as conveyance and it should have been properly stampped. Reliance was placed on Smt. Jamna Bai vs. Tulsi Ram (2); Madan Mohan vs. Gauri Shankar (3); and Nihal Singh vs. Singh Ram & Ors. (4).

(3). On

Click Here to Read the rest of this document