##PAGE1##

[2026:RJ-JP:12057]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17970/2023 Mohan Lal Sharma S/o Shri Shyoji Lal Sharma, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Village Post Sitarampura, Tehsil -Malpura, District

Tonk (Rajasthan)

----Petitioner Versus

Smt. Saubhagyawati W/o Shri Ramswaroop, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Plot No. 155A, Mahaveer Colony, Sanganer And Plot No. 405C, Govardhan Nagar Toll Tax Near New Sun Bright Senior

Secondary School Sanganer, Jaipur (Raj.)

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kishan Swami Mr. Vishvesh Gupta

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Davendra Kumar

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIPIN GUPTA

Judgment / Order

23/03/2026

1. The present writ petition has been filed assailing the order dated 24.05.2023 passed by the learned Additional District Judge No. 10, Jaipur Metropolitan-I, Headquarters Sanganer, in Civil Suit No. 238/2014, whereby the application filed by the petitioner seeking permission to execute the agreement to sell dated 14.08.2013, after payment of stamp duty before the Collector

(Stamps), has been rejected.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 13.07.2017, in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15468/2016, allowed the petitioner and granted an opportunity to receive the original agreement to sell from the Court and to produce it before the Collector (Stamps) for

impounding, after placing a certified copy on record.

3. Learned counsel further submits that the document was thereafter obtained from the learned trial Court and was placed

(Uploaded on 07/04/2026 at 09:35:09 AM)

(Downloaded on 11/04/2026 at 03:41:43 PM)

[2026:RJ-JP:12057] (2 of 3) [CW-17970/2023] before the Collector (Stamps), who, after due consideration, valued the instrument and raised a demand for deposit of the

deficit stamp duty along with penalty.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the said demand was duly paid by the petitioner, and a certificate to

that effect was issued by the Collector (Stamps) on 22.07.2022.

5. Learned counsel, therefore, submits that since the appropriate stamp duty has now been paid, the document ought to be permitted to be exhibited in evidence, which has been

wrongly declined by the learned trial Court.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner had earlier marked the said agreement in his affidavit and exhibited it. However, on an application filed by the respondents, the same was deleted by the trial Court. Against that order, the petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 9072/2017, and a Co- ordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 04.05.2021, found no illegality or perversity in the said deletion. He further submits that since the said order has been upheld, the learned trial Court rightly declined permission to exhibit the document, and the

impugned order dated 24.05.2023 does not call for interference.

7. Perused the material available on record.

8. This Court finds that the order of deletion, confirmed on 05.04.2021, was passed at a time when the document was insufficiently stamped. However, pursuant to the order of the Coordinate Bench dated 13.07.2017, the deficit stamp duty has since been paid, and a certificate to that effect has been issued by the Collector (Stamps) on 22.07.2022. Therefore, the basis on

(Uploaded on 07/04/2026 at 09:35:09 AM)

(Downloaded on 11/04/2026 at 03:41:43 PM)

[2026:RJ-JP:12057] (3 of 3) [CW-17970/2023] which the document was earlier held to be inadmissible no longer

survives.

9. This Court further observes that the suit is presently at the stage of plaintiff’s evidence, and since the document has now been duly and sufficiently stamped, there remains no impediment to its admissibility under the provisions of the Rajasthan Stamp

Act, 1998.

10. Accordingly, this Court finds that the learned trial Court has committed illegality and perversity in passing the impugned order dated 24.05.2023, by declining the petitioner’s application seeking per