IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA REVIEW PETITION NO.169 OF 2019 BETWEEN 1. SRI G N VEERABHADRAPPA, S/O LATE G G NEELAKANTAPPA, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, R/O NO.2043, SHREE CHANNAVEERESHWARA KRUPA, 3RD A MAIN ROAD, S S LAYOUT B BLOCK, BEHIND INDOOR STADIUM, DAVANAGERE-577004.
2. SRI CHANBDRASHEKAR G G, S/O LATE G N GURUSHANTHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, R/O NO.2991, 7TH MAIN, M C C BLOCK, DAVANAGERE-577004.
3. SRI G N CHANNAVEERAPPA, S/O LATE G NEELAKANTAPPA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/O NO.2991, 7TH MAIN, M C C BLOCK, DAVANAGERE-577004.
4. SRI G N MANJUNATHAPPA, S/O LATE G NEELAKANTAPPA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/O NO.2991, 7TH MAIN, M C C ‘B’ BLOCK, DAVANAGERE-577004.
5. SRI G N SOMASHEKARAPPA, S/O LATE G NEELAKANTAPPA, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, R/O NO.417, SHANTHI NILAYA, 13TH CROSS, 2ND MAIN ROAD, S NIJALINGAPPA LAYOUT, DAVANAGERE-577044.
6. SRI G N SHAMBHULINGAPPA, S/O LATE G NEELAKANTAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/O NO.4101-5, 14TH CROSS, 8TH MAIN, SIDDAVEERAPPA, BADAVANE, SHYAMANUR, DAVANAGERE-577004.
7. SRI G N NAGARAJ, S/O LATE G NEELAKANTAPPA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/O NO.2043/7, 3RD MAIN, 1ST CROSS, S S LAYOUT B BLOCK DAVANAGER-577004.
8. SMT B K SHANTHAMMA @ GOWRAMMA, W/O KOTARABASAPPA, D/O LATE G NEELAKANTAPPA, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, R/AT NO.27, SRI CHAKRA, 2ND CROSS PARADISE COLONY, 7TH PHASE J P NAGAR, PUTTENAHALLI, BANGALORE-560078.
9. SMT ANASUYA, W/O LATE NAGABHUSHAN, D/O LATE G NEELAKANTAPPA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/O NO.2043/7, 3RD MAIN, 1ST CROSS, S S LAYOUT, B BLOCK, DAVANAGERE-577004.
10. SMT SHEEVALEELA, W/O MURAGESH HOLUR D/O LATE G NEELAKANTAPPA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/O NO.3653,4TH MAIN, 5TH CROSS, M C C B BLOCK, DAVANAGERE-577004. ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI VISHWAJITH SHETTY S, ADVOCATE) AND 1. SRI G N RAJASHEKHARAPPA, S/O LATE G NEELAKANTAPPA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, R/AT NO.4977/76, 3RD MAIN, 2ND CROSS, S S LAYOUT, B BLOCK, DAVANAGERE-577004.
2. SMT SUDHA G G, W/O LATE G N GURUSHANTHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/O NO.2991, 7TH MAIN, M C C BLOCK, DAVANAGERE-577004.
3. SRI KARIBASAPPA G G,, S/O LATE G N GURUSHANTHAPPA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/O NO.2991, 7TH MAIN, M C C BLOCK, DAVANAGERE-577004. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI K CHETHAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1, V/O DT: 15.07.2019 NOTICE TO R2 AND R3 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 114 READ WITH ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE PRAYING TO REVIEW THE ORDER DATED:15.04.2019 PASSED IN WRIT PETITION NO.12819/2019 BY THIS COURT.
THIS REVIEW PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER This review petition is filed to review the order dated 15.04.2019 made in W.P.No.12819/2019 disposing of the said writ petition by observing that if the petitioner wants to mark the document for collateral purpose, it is open for him to pay stamp duty together with penalty after the document is impounded by the trial Court and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the trial Court refused for marking of the document only on the ground that it is an unregistered document and it is inadmissible in evidence.
3. In view of the dictum of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of SITA RAM BHAMA VS. RAMVATAR BHAMA reported in AIR 2018 SC 3057, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the unregistered document can be marked subject to payment of stamp duty together with penalty. This Court has observed that it is open for the petitioners to pay stamp duty together with penalty after the document is impounded by the trial Court. It is made clear that after the payment of stamp duty together with penalty, the trial Court can permit the petitioners to mark the document for collateral purpose i.e., severance of title, nature of possession of various shares but not for the primary purpose i.e. division of joint properties by metes and bounds.
4. In view of the above, the review petition is allowed in part. The impugned order dated 15.04.2019 passed by this Court in W.P.No.12819/2019 is modified permitting the petitioners to pay stamp duty together with interest after the document is impounded by the trial Court, and if the stamp duty together with penalty is paid by the petitioners, the trial Court is directed to permit the petitioners to mark the document only for collateral purpose as stated above.
Accordingly, Review petition stands disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE BSR