Jodhpur:<\/strong> The Rajasthan High Court has directed the trial court to follow the prescribed legal procedure for dealing with an insufficiently stamped agreement in a long-pending property dispute. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Justice Farjand Ali observed that a stamp-duty objection should not remain pending for years while the main case continues to be delayed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The dispute concerns a specific performance suit filed in 2014, based on agreements dated March 4, 1976 and June 21, 2001. The defendants had objected that the agreements were neither properly stamped nor registered. The trial court had framed the issue of their admissibility in 2009.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The High Court clarified that an unregistered agreement to sell can still be relied upon in a specific performance suit. However, if the agreement is insufficiently stamped, it cannot be admitted in evidence until the required stamp duty and penalty are paid.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Court directed the trial court to send the document to the Collector-cum-DIG, Stamps, who must determine the deficient stamp duty within 20 days. Once the required amount is paid, the trial court can proceed with the case and decide the document\u2019s admissibility in accordance with law.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The High Court also directed the trial court to make every effort to decide the original suit within nine months from the date it receives a certified copy of the order. The Court further asked the trial court to avoid unnecessary adjournments.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Bench of Justice Farjand Ali made it clear that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the property dispute. Its directions were limited to ensuring that the stamp-duty issue was dealt with through the procedure prescribed by law.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Court noted that the issue had remained pending for several years amid repeated hearings and transfers of the suit. It observed that litigants should not be made to wait indefinitely over an issue that can be resolved through the statutory process.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The ruling effectively clears the procedural hurdle standing in the way of the long-pending property suit, allowing the trial court to move forward with the main dispute.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Court directs statutory process to decide stamp deficiency and asks trial court to finish suit within nine months Jodhpur: The Rajasthan High Court has directed the trial court to follow the prescribed legal procedure for dealing with an insufficiently stamped agreement in a long-pending property dispute. Justice Farjand Ali observed that a stamp-duty objection should … Read more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":9297,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_wppp_is_locked":false,"_wppp_selected_plans":[],"footnotes":""},"categories":[69,29],"tags":[1755,1751,2426,971,48,2423,483,659,43,2422,1753,2421,2425,951,2424],"class_list":["post-9471","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-rajasthan-high-court","category-top-stories","tag-agreement-to-sell","tag-collector-stamps","tag-insufficiently-stamped-agreement","tag-justice-farjand-ali","tag-legal-news","tag-property-case","tag-property-dispute","tag-rajasthan-hc","tag-rajasthan-high-court","tag-specific-performance-suit","tag-stamp-duty","tag-stamp-duty-issue","tag-stamp-duty-penalty","tag-trial-court","tag-unregistered-agreement"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawsandlegals.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9471","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawsandlegals.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawsandlegals.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawsandlegals.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawsandlegals.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=9471"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/lawsandlegals.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9471\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":9472,"href":"https:\/\/lawsandlegals.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9471\/revisions\/9472"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawsandlegals.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/9297"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawsandlegals.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=9471"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawsandlegals.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=9471"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawsandlegals.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=9471"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}