[2025:RJ-JP:5059] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 21455/2017 Shivani Chaturvedi W/o. Shri Rajesh Chaturvedi, Resident Of A- 202, Shrinath Estate, Mbs Nagar Station Road, Kota (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus 1. Jaswant Singh S/o. Shri Sohan Singh, Resident Of Purohitji Ki Tapri, Tehsil Ladpura, District Kota (Raj.) 2. Jagdish Puri S/o. Shri Deewan Sardari Lal, Resident Of Purana Baggikhana, Nayapura, Kota (Raj.) 3. Ashok Puri S/o. Shri Jagdish Puri, Resident Of Purana Baggikhana, Nayapura, Kota (Raj.) (Since Deceased) 3/1. Smt. Sheela Puri W/o. Late Shri Ashok Puri, Resident Of Puri Brothers, Purani Baggi Khana, Kota (Raj.) 3/2. Smt. Chetna D/o. Late Shri Ashok Puri, Resident Of Puri Brothers, Purani Baggi Khana, Kota (Raj.) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shailesh Prakash Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Pradeep Singh, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA Order 05/02/2025 This Civil Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner- defendant (for short 'the defendant') against the order dated 18.09.2017 passed by Additional Civil Judge (J.D.) & Judicial Magistrate No.1 (North), Kota in Case No.315/2001, whereby the review application filed by the defendant has been dismissed. Learned counsel for the defendant submits that respondent No.1-plaintiff (for short 'the plaintiff') filed a suit against the defendant in which defendant filed an application under Order 13 Rule 3 CPC and Stamp Act that sale agreement dated 20.01.1994 [2025:RJ-JP:5059] (2 of 3) [CW-21455/2017] is insufficiently stamped and not registered. So, it cannot be exhibited but trial court vide order dated 22.05.2017 dismissed the application filed by the defendant on the ground that the document is already exhibited, so, it cannot be considered as inadmissible at this stage. Learned counsel for the defendant also submits that trial court had committed error. As per Stamp Act, document should have been sufficiently stamped. So, order of the trial court be set aside. Learned counsel for the respondent(s) has opposed the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the defendant and submits that trial court rightly dismissed the application filed by the defendant. So, present petition be dismissed. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the defendant as well as learned counsel for the respondent(s). It is an admitted position that the said document was exhibited on 14.02.2001. So, in my considered opinion, trial court rightly came to the conclusion that said objection cannot be opened raised at this stage but in my view, trial court had to consider the objection raised by the defendant at the time of final arguments. So, present petition filed by the defendant deserves to be disposed of. Accordingly, the orders dated 18.09.2017 and 22.05.2017 passed by the trial court are set aside. The Civil Writ Petition filed by the defendant stands disposed of with direction to the trial court to decide the objection raised by the defendant at the time of final disposal of the suit. [2025:RJ-JP:5059] (3 of 3) [CW-21455/2017] Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of. (NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J Jatin/93