Title of the Case: Vijay Kumar Goyal (Dead) Thr. LR. Vs. Neena Rani & Ors.
Head Notes: It can be seen that the
possession has not been delivered under the said agreements. In these
agreements, it is specifically mentioned that the possession of the
disputed land in question was already with the appellant.Thus, it cannot be said that the possession of the
land in question was delivered through under the said agreements of
which the specific performance is sought.In that view of the matter,
Entry No. 5 of Schedule 1-A of the Indian Stamp Act as amended by the
State of Punjab shall not be applicable. As observed
hereinabove, the plaintiff was already in possession prior to the
execution of the aforesaid agreements as per the recitals in the
aforesaid two agreements. It is to be noted that even the plaintiff has also not sought the possession in the suit filed by him and has in fact
sought the permanent injunction restraining the defendants from
interfering in the peaceful possession of the plaintiff and from
dispossessing or causing to dispossess the plaintiff from the suit
property.
Court: Honourable Supreme Court of India
Judges: Honourable Justice M.R. SHAH & KRISHNA MURAR
