1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1900 OF 2005 Baitut-Talim-at Tayebi Trust and Ors. ... Petitioners Vs. The State of Maharashtra and anr... Respondents Mr. Manoj Dalvi i/by Banatwala & Co. for Petitioner. Mr.K.R.Belosey, A.G.P. for Respondents. CORAM: F.I. CORAM: F.I. CORAM: F.I. REBELLO REBELLO REBELLO & ANOOP V. MOHTA,JJ. ANOOP V. MOHTA,JJ. ANOOP V. MOHTA,JJ. DATED: SEPTEMBER 12, 2006 DATED: SEPTEMBER 12, 2006 DATED: SEPTEMBER 12, 2006 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . The relief sought for by the Petitioner was to direct the respondents to trace the documents lodged for registration and hand over the same to the Petitioner on payment of stamp duty. The Respondents have filed reply. It is pointed out that he records were searched and it is found that the documents lodged by the Petitioners under amnesty scheme, which is shown in the old record at Sr. No. 7544 are not traceable in the office. The Respondent have further set out that if the Petitioners submit certified copy of the document duly notarised along with an undertaking that the Petitioner has not lodged similar document in any other office for registration and the Petitioner will pay the stamp duty at the market value as will be decided by the Superintendent of stamps, the 2 respondent will consider the same. In the light of that, the following order . The Petitioners to comply with the requirement as set out in Paragraph 4 of the affidavit of Suresh Sakharkar, Dy. Superintendent of Stamps, Mumbai dated 3.2.2006. On such compliance Respondent to take steps according to law at any rate within four weeks from the Petitioners complying with the requirement. . With the above observations, Petition stands disposed of. (ANOOP V. MOHTA,J.) (ANOOP V. MOHTA,J.) (ANOOP V. MOHTA,J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.)