1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.7129 OF 2008 Vitthal Sakharam Chate and others PETITIONERS VERSUS Ashabai Kundlik Chate RESPONDENT Mr.Vivek Bhavthankar, advocate for petitioners. Mr.Sandip Gorudepatil, holding for Mr.U.B.Bondar, advocate for the respondent. (CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.) DATE : 30/06/2009 PER COURT : 1. The present writ petition is filed by the petitioners/original defendants in Spl.C.S.No.33/2002, below Exh.113 on the file of Civil Judge, J.D. Ambejogai. Heard advocate for petitioners, followed by the arguments of advocate for respondent. The respondent herein has filed suit for specific performance against the petitioners/original defendants to the suit on the basis of alleged execution of agreement of sale dated 31/07/2002. It appears that after filing of the suit and on service of summons, the petitioners/defendants appeared in the suit and contested the suit by filing their written statement. After framing of issues, the parties were directed to lead the evidence. 2 Accordingly evidence was lead and thereafter the suit was listed for final arguments. It appears that at the stage of final arguments, an objection was raised by the present petitioners that the document of agreement of sale dated 31/07/2002 was executed without duly stamped, and hence inadmissible in evidence and can not be read in evidence. At that stage, an application was moved vide Exh.113 by the respondent plaintiff seeking permission to pay the deficit stamp duty with penalty on the said document of agreement of sale which application was allowed after hearing the both sides vide order dated 03/10/2008, which order is under challenge by way of present writ petition. 2. Heard the arguments advanced across the bar by learned advocate appearing for petitioners followed by the arguments of advocate for respondent. During the course of submissions across the bar, reliance was placed by learned advocate appearing for the respondent on the judgment of Full Bench reported in 2008(6) Mh.L.J. in the matter of Hemendra Rasiklal Ghia versus Subodh Mody, wherein two questions were framed by the Reference Court about “when the objection to be raised about the production of documents and relating to deficiency of stamp duty.” It is observed in para no.92 that such objections relating to the production of the document and deficiency of the stamp duty to be raised when the document is tendered in the evidence. From the material on record, nowhere it shows that any such objection was raised by the petitioners/ defendants before the Trial Court at the time of 3 document was tendered in the evidence and was exhibited. If such objection is raised at the belted stage when the suit was listed for final arguments then such objection raised by the petitioners/ defendants is devoid of any merits. As there are no merits in the writ petition,the writ petition is to be rejected at the stage of admission itself. 3. At the same time, on reading the operative part below Exh.113 by which the application is allowed, the directions were given by the Trial Court to the Supdt. of the Court to do the further needful by abiding the provisions of Law, which part of the operative order require to be modified with the direction to the Supdt. Of the Trial Court to refer the document to the Collector of Stamps to take the necessary action about the payment of deficit stamp duty and the penalty to be charged on it. With these directions, writ petition stands disposed of with no order as to costs. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/wp7129-08