O R D E R

The Civil Revision Petition is directed as against the fair and decretal order passed on 05.03.2016 in I.A.No.153 of 2016 in O.S.No.25 of 2012 by the Additional District Munsif, Cheyyar, Tiruvannamalai District, thereby allowed the petition to order for Stamp Duty and penalty in respect of unregistered sale deed and permit to mark it as exhibit.

st

2.The 1 respondent filed a suit for declaration declaring that the st nd rd sale deed executed by the 1 and 2 defendant in favour of the 3 defendant dated 04.03.2011, vide document No.562 of 2011 as null and void st nd and also for mandatory injunction, directing the 1 and 2 defendant to st register the sale deed executed by them in favour of the 1 respondent herein dated 30.09.2006, in respect of the suit schedule property. Admittedly, the sale deed dated 30.09.2006 is unstamped and unregistered st one. While pending the suit, the 1 respondent filed a petition to impound the same for paying Stamp Duty as well as the penalty to mark the same as rd one of the exhibit. The petitioner is the 3 defendant in the suit filed by the st

1 respondent herein and he is the purchaser of the suit property from the st nd

1 and 2 defendants in the suit. The Court below allowed the petition on the ground that there is no bar to mark the unregistered document, after paying necessary Stamp Duty and penalty and the same can be used for collateral purpose. Further observed that mere marking of the document will not make it admission of evidence. In this regard, the learned counsel for the petitioner rely upon the following Judgments:

(i)in the case of Amertham Vs. Thannace, reported in 2020 (4)

CTC 395 and relevant portion is given below:- "Registration Act, 1908 (16 of 1908), Section

49 - Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (2 of 1899), Section 35 - Unstamped unregistered Sale Deed - Whether admissible in evidence for collateral purpose in Suit for declaration of title - Plaintiff claimed adverse possession and marked unstamped unregistered Sale Deed to prove possession - No specific plea of Adverse Possession in Plaint - Purpose of marking said Sale Deed is only to prove Plaintiff's title as per pleadings - Held, document cannot be looked into for any collateral purpose as it is neither stamped nor registered - Unregistered Sale Deed cannot be admitted in evidence as Plaintiff claims title and Suit itself is for Declaration of Title based on unregistered Sale Deed - Collateral transaction must be independent and divisible from transaction, which requires registration - Collateral transaction should be one, which does not create or extinguish title or interest in immovable property - Trial Court right in holding that document is inadmissible in evidence for want of Stamp Duty and Registration - Civil Revision Petition is dismissed."

(ii) in the case of Dhananjezhiyan and another Vs. Kuppu and others reported in 2020 (5) CTC 812. The head notes are given below:-

"Registration Act, 1908 (16 of 1908), Sections 17 & 49 - Stamp Act, 1899 (2 of 1899), Section 35 - Unregistered and Unstamped document - Plaintiffs seeking Declaratory relief on basis of unregistered and unstamped document - Unstamped and unregistered document is inadmissible in evidence - It cannot be relied upon in Court proceedings, when such document becomes basis of claim of person tracing his/her title - Lower Courts rightly rejected said document - Second Appeal dismissed."

(iii) in the case of Chandra Sundararaj and other Vs.C.M.Dhinakaran @ Suresh and others reported in 2019 (6) CTC 517.

Head notes are here:-

"Registration Act, 1908 (16 of 1908), Section

17 - Document purporting to be Family Arrangement to be registered, if it effects relinquishment of rights over properties - Such document should be properly stamped and registered, and unregistered document not admissible in evidence."

3.This Court repeatedly held, that the document cannot be looked into for any collateral purpose as it is neither stamped nor registered. The unregistered sale deed cann