Hon'ble DR. KOTHARI, J.—After arguing the matter at some length, learned counsel for the petitioner prayed for withdrawal of writ petition, which request is turned down for the following reasons: This writ petition is filed against the order dated 30.7.2009, whereby the learned trial Court rejected the application of defendant petitioner dated 15.7.2009, wherein the defendant insisted upon the payment of stamp duty on rent notes produced by him (tenant) before the learned trial Court in the cross suit filed by him against the plaintiff regarding fixation of standard rent. The Collector (Stamps) vide his order dated 16.6.2009 has prima facie erred in fixing the liability to pay stamp duty with penalty on the plaintiff with respect to documents produced by the defendant tenant. The said order, therefore, clearly deserves to be set aside as far as it fixes the liability on plaintiff landlord to pay such stamp duty. Since the documents produced in question are rent notes which have been produced by the defendant tenant, if any deficiency in stamp duty is there, the defendant tenant himself should remove such deficiency and such liability cannot be affixed on the plaintiff landlord. 2. In view of this, learned trial Court has not erred in rejecting the application of the defendant dated 15.7.2009 asking the plaintiff landlord to pay such deficit stamp duty. 3. This writ petition being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. 4. If the defendants-petitioner wants to rely upon these documents then it is the liability of defendant petitioner to pay stamp duty fixed by the Collector (Stamps). If however, he does not want to rely on these documents, it is his choice and those documents may be taken off from the record of the case. With these observations, this writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. Copy of this order be sent to trial Court and opposite side.