1 WP318/2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.318 OF 2011 Shri Prabhakar Kashinathrao Shinde .... Petitioner. v/s Shri Harish Pannalal Patel and another ..... Respondents. Mr. R.M. Haridas i/b Mr. P.N. Joshi for the Petitioner. CORAM: V. M. KANADE, J. DATE : 24th January, 2011 P.C.:- 1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner. 2. Petitioner/original Defendant No.2 is aggrieved by the order passed by the Civil Judge, Junior Division, who was pleased to reject the application filed by the Petitioner herein for impounding of an agreement of sale dated 1/7/1995 on the ground that it is not properly stamped. According to the Petitioner, market value of the said property is Rs 40 lacs whereas stamp duty has been paid only on an amount of Rs 58,000/- by the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2/original Plaintiffs. This application has been rejected by the Trial Court on the ground that the the Plaintiffs i.e. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 2 WP318/2011 herein had filed a suit for specific performance of the said agreement and for possession and, therefore, the Court felt that the submission made regarding insufficient stamp duty being paid could not be accepted. 3. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner invited my attention to the Article 25 (Explanation-1) of the Bombay Stamp Act. He submitted that by virtue of the said amendment which was brought into force in 1994, even in cases where possession was not handed over, stamp duty which was leviable was on the basis that possession is deemed to be handed over. 4. In my view, the said submission made by the learned Counsel for the petitioner cannot be accepted. In the present case, suit has been filed for specific performance of the agreement and for possession of the property. Admittedly, possession is still with the Petitioner and, therefore, in my view Trial Court was justified in rejecting the said application. In any event, since the Petitioner has raised this objection at the inception, the Trial Court shall consider this issue at the time of the hearing of the Suit. 5. Petition is accordingly disposed off. (V.M. KANADE, J.) 3 WP318/2011