C O M M O N O R D E R

These Civil Revision Petitions have been filed to set aside the impugned orders dated 12.07.2016 passed in I.A.Nos.13607 of 2015 and 532 of 2016 in O.S.No.6825 of 2012 on the file of VI Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai.

2.The respondent filed a suit for declaration and injunction in respect of the suit schedule property as against the defendants, in which the petitioner is the 1st defendant. The respondent filed the suit through his power of attorney-agent. The power of attorney was examined as P.W.1. While examination of P.W.1, the power of attorney marked the document executed by the respondent and it was marked Ex.A1. At that juncture, the petitioner filed petitions in I.A.Nos.13607 of 2015 and 532 of 2016 to impound the Ex.A1 and to stay all further proceedings of the suit. Both the petitions were dismissed and aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred these Civil Revision Petitions.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that admittedly the Ex.A1, unstamped and unregistered power of attorney executed by the respondent. The power of attorney is none other than the father in law of the respondent. The Ex.A1 has been printed in the hundred rupees stamp paper, which has been purchased in India and thereafter it was sent back to USA. It was executed at USA in front of Notary Public. Thereafter it was sent to India and admittedly, it was not adjudicated before the authority concerned. He further submitted that the said Ex.A1, must be adjudicated before concerned Collector within a period of three months as per the procedure contemplated under the Indian Stamp Act.

4.Further, the Section 17(2)(v) of the Tamil Nadu Registration Act, 1908, contemplated that any document other than the documents specified in sub-section (1-A), not itself creating, declaring, assigning, limiting or extinguishing any right, title or interest of the value of one hundred rupees and upwards to or in immovable property, but merely creating a right to obtain another document which will, when executed, create, declare, assign, limit or extinguish any such right, title or interest. Further, he pointed out that the power of attorney, recognized for the purpose of Section 32 of the Tamilnadu Registration Act, viz., the persons to present the document for presentation, if the principal at the time aforesaid does not reside in India a power of attorney executed before and authenticated by a Notary Public or any Court, Judge, Magistrate, Indian counsel or vice counsel or representative of the Central Government. Admittedly, the Ex.A1 is unstamped and unregistered one. Therefore, it is necessarily impounded for payment of Stamp duty and penalty as contemplated under the Tamil Nadu Stamp Act. In support of his contention, he relied upon the following Judgments:-

1.Government of Andhra Pradesh and others Vs. P.Laxmi Devi [(2008) 4 SCC 720]

2. Malaysian Airlines Systems BHD Vs. STIC Travels (P) Ltd., [(2001) 1 SCC 451]

3. R.Kalyani and others Vs. T.Rose Mukundakumar [2014 (2)

CTC 157]

4. D.Balachandran Vs. T.C.Shanmugam [2013-3-L.W.99]

5.Though notice was served to the respondent and no one has present before this Court, either by person or through his counsel. 6.The petitioner is the 1st defendant in the suit filed by the respondent herein for declaration, declaring that the settlement deed dated

10.01.2007 registered vide document No.73 of 2007 as null and void and for permanent injunction in respect of the suit schedule property.

7.The principal of the plaintiff is residing at USA. He executed the power of attorney in favour of his father in law to conduct the suit, on behalf of him. On the strength of the power of attorney, power agent filed a suit and marked Ex.A1-power of attorney. While the matter was posted for cross examination of P.W.1., the petitioner filed a petition to impound the Ex.A1. According to the petitioner, the Stamp paper of Ex.A1 was purchased at Chennai and it was sent to USA after prompting the power of