1 WP 2619 of 2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

907 WRIT PETITION NO. 2619 OF 2017

MADHAVRAO MANIKRAO SONAVANE AND OTHERS

VERSUS

RAZIYA BEGUM ABDUL AZIM THROUGH GPA ABDUL

SALIM ABDULAZIM

----

Shri. N.B. Khandare, Advocate, for petitioners.

Shri. R.N. Dhorde, Senior Advocate, for respondent.

----

Coram: T.V. NALAWADE, J.

Date : 5 July 2017.

ORDER:

1)

The petition is filed to challenge the order

made by the learned Civil Judge Junior Division

Aurangabad on Exhibit 49 in Regular Civil Suit

No.608/2010. Both the sides are heard.

2)

The suit is filed for specific performance of

contract of sale of immovable property by the present

respondent against the petitioners. It is contended that

the agreement took place in the year 1996 and entire

2 WP 2619 of 2017

consideration was paid and one document was also

executed in furtherance of the said agreement. One

document titled as "sale deed" is produced on the record

and the plaintiff will be using this document to show that

there was such agreement.

3)

As it was a document of agreement of sale,

application was moved by the petitioners for sending the

document to the Collector or for making order of

impounding of the document. Learned Judge of the trial

Court has held that said document is to be treated as

agreement of sale and it cannot be treated as deed of sale

and in view of the provisions of the Bombay Stamp Act

which were applicable, there is no need to send the

document to the Collector or to impound the document by

the Court itself.

4)

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted

that due to observations of the trial court that the said

document is an agreement of sale, the contentions of the

defendants about the document will not be considered on

merits while deciding the suit. This contention has no

3 WP 2619 of 2017

base. The contention is decided only for the purpose of

stamp duty and for deciding the request made by the

defendants to impound the document. This Court has

carefully gone through the provisions of the Bombay

Stamps Act and particularly Article 25 governing the said

situation. This Court is avoiding to discuss the contents of

the document to see that the trial court is not influenced.

All the points will be open before the trial court during

trial on merits. With these observations the writ petition

is disposed of as dismissed.

Sd/-

(T.V. NALAWADE, J.)

rsl