IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT WRIT PETITION NO.42629 OF 2018 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN:
GEORGE MATHEW AGED 52 YEARS S/O. K.C.GEORGE PARIJATHA HOUSE BOLINJEGUTTU NADASAL VILLAGE PODABIDRI POST – 574 124 UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT ... PETITIONER (BY SRI S.K. ACHARYA, ADVOCATE) AND:
VINOD B.SHETTY AGED 52 YEARS S/O. LATE BOJA N.SHETTY HOSA OKKALU HOUSE PADUHITHLU NADASAL VILLAGE PODABIDRI POST – 574 124 UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT … RESPONDENT THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 24.07.2018 (ANNEXURE-A) PASSED ON THE COURT OF THE III ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, UDUPI IN O.S.NO.297/2015 AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Petitioner being the defendant in an injunctive suit in O.S.No.4/2015 is invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court for assailing the order dated 24.07.2018 made by the learned III Additional Civil Judge, Udupi whereby the subject agreement dated 08.07.1998 has been impounded under Section 33 for the purpose of recovery of deficit stamp duty & penalty under Section 34 of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957.
2. Having heard the leaned counsel for the petitioner and having perused the petition papers, this Court declines to grant indulgence in the matter inasmuch as admittedly the subject document mentions about delivery of possession of the property. Therefore, the stamp duty on par with conveyance is payable. The contention that the document is in respect of the some other property and not the suit property and therefore, the subject instrument could not have been impounded under Sections 33 & 34 of the Act is legally untenable.
In the above circumstances, the writ petition being devoid of merits is rejected in limine.
Sd/- JUDGE KTY