ASIM KUMAR MONDAL,J. - (1.) THIS revisional application is directed against the order Being No. 28 dated 4.6.2008 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Second Court at Baruipur, in Title Suit No. 55 of 2002 (T.S. No. 68 of 2008).
(2.) THE opposite party/plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance of contract and for injunction against the petitioner in the Court below. The petitioner being a defendant duly entered appearance in the said suit and filed a written statement and thereby denied all the material allegations made in the plaint. The opposite party sought for specific performance upon an agreement, which was not registered. Accordingly, as prayed the settled provisions of law such document requires being impounded. So, the opposite party was required to take steps in this regard. The learned Court below by its order dated 4.6.2008 directed the Saristadar of its office to make valuation of the unregistered agreement for impounding of the said unregistered document.
(3.) ON 1.9.2009, the Saristadar submitted a report showing the valuation as only Rs. 30,000/- and learned Court below thereafter directed the plaintiff/opposite party to take steps for putting the cost. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said orders dated 4.6.2008 and 1.9.2009 passed by the learned Court below the petitioner/plaintiff preferred the instant application under article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking a revision of the order impugned on the grounds that learned Court below acted illegally and without jurisdiction in directing the Saristadar to impound the unregistered document and for submission of report of valuation under Section 33 of the Indian Stamp Act and as such the order impugned is fully unwarranted in law. Further that the Saristadar had no authority to receive evidence and as such he is not at all competent to impound a document.;