Order 1

Order Details: Order Below EX 1
Pdf Text: … 1 … C.C.No.841/SS/2018
MHMM180046392018
C.C.No.841/SS/2018
Devinderpal Darshansingh
Chawla Vs. Ashish
Chandrakant Shah
IN THE COURT OF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, 58TH COURT,
BANDRA, MUMBAI
ORDER BELOW APPLICATION AT EXH.29
1. The accused herein has filed present application u/sec.
34 of Bombay Stamp Act for impounding the Memorandum of
Understanding dated 28.03.2016 produced by the complainant.
According to the accused the document is not duly stamped and it
needs to be impounded by this court for collection of revenue.
2. The complainant objected the application vide reply at
Exh.30. It is contended on behalf of the complainant that MOU in
dispute is duly stamped and endorsed on stamp paper of Rs.100/. No
specific stamp duty is required for the document of Memorandum of
Understanding. Further in criminal trial under special statute,
provisions of Bombay Stamp Act will not be applicable. Accordingly,
prayed for rejecting the application.
3. Heard, Ld. Advocate for the accused S.J. Dube and
Advocate Milind Gaware for the complainant.
4. Needless to state that the Memorandum of
Understanding Exh.11 placed on record is in respect of the deal and
transaction in between the complainant and accused wrote on
Rs.100/ stamp paper. The same is neither the document of transfer
of title, nor for sale, gift etc., which are to be compulsorily registered
-- 1 of 2 --
… 2 … C.C.No.841/SS/2018
and endorsed on particular stamp paper. The document of
Memorandum of Understanding does not fall within the ambit of
section 17 of Registration Act 1908, so as to send it for impounding to
the District Collector for collecting deficit stamp duty. Proviso (C) of
section 34 of Bombay Stamp Act, 1958 states that, “Nothing herein
contained shall prevent the admission of any instrument in evidence
in any proceeding in a Criminal Court, other than a proceeding under
Chapter IX or Part D of Chapter X of the Code of Criminal Procedure
1973”. Therefore, it is crystal clear that there is no legal necessity to
impound document of Memorandum of Understanding for present
trial under special statute. The burden to prove the contents of the
document lies solely on the complainant. Therefore, I found no merits
in the application. Though, this proceeding is Quasi Civil Proceeding,
the documents in question being of Memorandum of Understanding
in between the parties relating to the transaction in question, appears
to be admissible documents. Hence, I pass following order.
ORDER
1. The application is rejected.
2. The accused to cross examine the
complainant positively on next date.
3. Order dictated and pronounced in open
court.
Mumbai, (M. P. Saraf)
Dated : 06.06.2023. Metropolitan Magistrate,
58th Court, Bandra, Mumbai.
J.O.Code MH01362
-- 2 of 2 --