Unregistered documents affecting immovable property cannot be used in legal proceedings and cannot be admitted as evidence.

This revision is directed against the Judgment and Decree of the learned District Munsif, Hosur, dated 20.12.1999 made in I.A.No.707/1999 in O.S.No.121/1993, allowing the petition filed under Or.13, R.9 and Section 151 CPC and holding that the document is inadmissible in evidence. The Plaintiff is the revision Petitioner.

2. Case of the Plaintiff is that the Defendants have borrowed a sum of Rs.15,000/- repayable in three years. In lieu of interest, the Defendants are said to have hypothecated the mulberry crops in S.No.103 – 50 cents. To that effect, the Defendants 1 and 2 have executed an agreement on 8.1.1992, wherein they have acknowledged the receipt of the amount. The Defendants have not repaid the amount. Hence the Plaintiff issued legal notice to the Defendants calling upon them to allow her to draw water from the well to do mulberry crop plantation or pay back the amount. The Defendants though received the notice did not reply the notice nor paid the amount and also not complied with the demand of the notice. Hence the suit has been filed directing the Defendants to pay Rs.15,000/-.

3. Denying the averments in the Plaint, Defendants have filed Written Statement inter-alia contending that the alleged document is possessory mortgage which should be on stamped papers for proper value and they should have been registered. For want of registration and insufficiency of stamps the document is inadmissible in evidence. The Plaintiff's husband wanted the second Defendant to be his farm servant. It was agreed that the Plaintiff would pay Rs.5000/- to the second Defendant, for which the Plaintiff's husband took the thumb impression and signature of the Defendant in blank stamp papers and the same has been created as a loan transaction. The Plaintiffs have neither borrowed the amount nor have the means to pay the amount.

4.I.A.No.707/1999:-

During the pendency of the suit this application was filed by the Defendants under Or.13 R.3 CPC and Sec.151 CPC on the ground that the document is inadmissible in evidence. According to the Defendants, the document is liable for stamp duty as required for mortgage, under section 58 of Transfer of Property Act. The document without payment of proper Stamp Duty cannot be received in evidence under Section 35 of the Stamp Act. Further the document should have been registered under section 17 of the Registration Act and is inadmissible under Section 49 of the Registration Act.

5. Resisting the application, the Plaintiff has filed the counter statement contending that the possession of mulberry crop was given only for a short time, which was later not complied with by the Defendants. The Plaintiff being innocent and illiterate lady, has no worldly knowledge. The question of mortgage or usufructory mortgage does not apply to the facts in hand.

6. Upon consideration of the submissions by both parties, the learned District Munsif held that the document relates to the transaction relating to immovable property creating the interest of the Plaintiff in the immovable property. On those reasonings the lower Court found that the agreement is not properly stamped and such insufficiently stamped document cannot be looked into and the document is inadmissible in evidence for want of proper stamp and registration.

7. Aggrieved over the same, the revision Petitioner has preferred this revision.

8. The learned counsel for the Revision Petitioner has submitted that the revision Petitioner has claimed only the principal amount. When that being so, it is contended that the lower Court has erred in finding that the document has not been properly stamped. The learned counsel for the revision Petitioner has further submitted that the document is relied upon only for showing the purpose of lending the money and that there is no impediment to look into the document. In support of his contention, the learned counsel has relied upon 2001 (3) SCC 1. Countering the same, the learned counsel for the respondents has subm