IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.7863/2010 Date of decision: 4.4.2011. Sonia Gill ....................Petitioner v. Gurdev Singh and others .....................Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Jaswant Singh Present: Mr.Namit Gautam,Advocate for the petitioner. Jaswant Singh.J.(Oral) Defendant no.1/petitioner has invoked the revisional jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution assailing the order dated 11.5.2010 (P1) whereby the learned trial Court has permitted the respondent/plaintiffs to affix the stamp duty on an un- stamped receipt dated 24.11.2004 in view of proviso to Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act,1899(for short the Act). Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the receipt is prima facie a completely forged document and therefore, making good of the deficiency of stamp duty could not be permitted. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, I find no merit in the plea raised. Plaintiffs/respondents had filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 78,049 (principal amount plus interest) on the basis of receipt dated 24.11.2004 executed by the defendant/petitioner in lieu of a loan having been taken. Since the document was unstamped an application was moved for making good the deficiency in stamp duty in view of proviso to Section 35 of the Act. This Court is in agreement with the reasoning adopted by the learned trial Court that the merits and demerits of the receipt are to be seen at the stage of trial and at this stage it was permissible for the respondents/plaintiffs to make good the deficiency in stamp duty in view of the unambiguous wording of the proviso to Section 35 of the Act which permits the making good of deficiency in stamp duty of an unstamped document at a later stage for it to be admissible in evidence. No merit. Dismissed. 4.4.2011 (Jaswant Singh) joshi Judge