When agreement of sale can be treated as conveyance even though possession of property is not transferred?

Omprakash v. Laxminarayan, (2014) 1 SCC 618

Stamp Act, 1899
Ss. 35, 33 & 38 and Sch. 1-A Art. 23 Expln. [as ins. vide Stamp (M.P. Second Amendment) Act, 1990] - Inadmissibility
of document not duly stamped - Question of admissibility of document - Matters decisive of - Recitals in the document or
pleadings of the parties/whether recitals have been given effect to in fact - Held, it is the recitals contained in the
document that are decisive and conclusive of its admissibility - Whether the recitals have been given effect to in fact, is a
question of fact which would require adjudication, but at the time of considering the question of admissibility of a
document, it is the recitals/terms and conditions contained therein which shall govern the issue of admissibility - In
present case, Sch. 1-A Art. 23 Expln. of Stamp Act as applicable in State of M.P. creates a legal fiction that an

agreement to sell shall be deemed to be a conveyance for the purpose of computation of stamp duty if possession is
transferred to the purchaser before execution of a conveyance - Agreement to sell dt. 27-12-2000 in present case
contained a recital that physical possession had been handed over to purchaser - However, appellant seller itself
disputing said fact in its pleadings in the suit and so also respondent buyer claiming relief of possession of suit land in the
suit - Thus, respondent buyer claiming that as possession in fact not having been delivered to it, recital to that effect in
agreement to sell dt. 27-12-2000 did not make the same a deemed conveyance for the purpose of computation of stamp
duty under the abovesaid Art. 23 Expln. - Tenability - Held, for the purpose of admissibility of a document it is the recitals
contained therein that are decisive and not the factual situation on the ground - Thus, as agreement to sell dt. 27-12-
2000 contained a clear recital that possession had been transferred to the buyer, the same shall be deemed to be a
conveyance for computation of stamp duty under the abovesaid Art. 23 Expln. - Trial court had correctly determined the
matter and returned the document to be properly stamped, and High Court had erred in accepting the above contention
of the respondent buyer and reversing the trial court's order - Trial court's order restored,