The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for documents to be duly stamped and registered, but also the possibility of admitting unregistered documents for collateral purposes, subject to the willingness of the party to pay the deficit stamp duty and penalty.

1. The revision petitioner is the second defendant in O.S.No.39 of 2000 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Sivagangai, laid by the respondent/plaintiff for declaration of title of the respondent/plaintiff over the suit property and for consequential permanent injunction. After the examination of plaintiff witnesses, the revision petitioner/second defendant, through D.W.1 proposed to mark an unregistered release deed dated 18.5.1980 to substantiate his case and the same was objected by the respondent/plaintiff contending that the said unregistered release deed dated 18.5.1980 cannot be admitted as evidence as per Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act. Accepting the objection of the respondent/plaintiff the learned Principal District Munsif, Sivagangai, by his order dated 7.8.2001 refused to admit the release deed dated 18.5.1980 even for collateral purpose. Hence, the above revision.

2. Mr. V.Ayyadurai, learned counsel for the petitioner, placing reliance on the decision of this Court in Ayyavu and others v. Shanti Bibi and others, 2000 (1) L.W 466 as well as the decision of the Apex Court in Chilakuri Gangulappa v. Revenue Divisional Officer, Etc. & Anr., 2001 (3) L.W.1 13, contends that the said unregistered release deed dated 18.5.1980 is admissible in evidence.

3.1. Per contra, Mr.V.Lakshminarayanan, learned counsel for the respondent, placing reliance on the decision in Yasodammal v. Janaki Ammal, 1968 (1) MLJ 249, contends that unstamped document cannot be admitted as evidence as per Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act.

3.2. It is further contended by the learned counsel for the respondent that Section 17 read with Section 49 of the Registration Act, 1908 also makes it clear that an unregistered document shall not be considered as evidence.

4. I have given careful consideration to the submissions of both sides.

5. In this regard, I am obliged to refer Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act and Sections 17 and 49 of the Registration Act, 1908.

"Section:35 of Indian Stamp Act- Instrument not duly stamped inadmissible in evidence, etc. -No instrument chargeable with duty shall be admitted in evidence for any purpose by any person having by law or consent of parties authority to receive evidence, or shall be acted upon, registered or authenticated by any such person or by any public officer, unless such instrument is duly stamped:

Provided that:-

(a) any such instrument not being an instrument chargeable with a duty not exceeding twenty paise only or a mortgage of crop chargeable under Section 3 with a duty of fifty paise or a bill of exchange or promissory note, shall, subject to all just exceptions, be admitted in evidence on payment of the duty with which the same is chargeable or, in the case of an instrument insufficiently stamped, of the amount required to make up such duty, together with a penalty of five rupees, or, when ten times the amount of proper duty or deficient portion thereof exceeds five rupees, of a sum equal to ten times such duty or portion;

(b) where any person from whom a stamped receipt could have been demanded, has given an unstamped receipt and such receipt, if stamped would be admissible in evidence against him, then such receipt shall be admitted in evidence against him on payment of a penalty of one rupee by the person tendering it; where a contract or agreement of any kind is effected by correspondence consisting of two or more letters and any one of the letters bears the proper stamp, the contract or agreement shall be deemed to be duly stamped;

(c) nothing herein contained shall prevent the admission of any instrument in evidence in any proceeding in a Criminal Court other than a proceeding under Chapter XII or Chapter XXXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898;

(d) nothing therein contained shall prevent the admission of any instrument in any Court, when such instrument has been executed by or on behalf of the Government or where it bears the certificate of the Coll