Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Sri V S Prabhakar vs Sri J Sundaram

High Court Of Karnataka|16 October, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT WRIT PETITION NO.6981 OF 2017 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN SRI.V.S.PRABHAKAR, S/O V.S.SHANKAR SA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.K-97, 6TH CROSS, MAGADI ROAD, BENGALURU-560 023. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI.S.RAJASHEKAR, ADVOCATE) AND 1 . SRI.J.SUNDARAM, S/O V.JEEVARATHINAM, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/AT NO.13/1A, 6TH CROSS, BHUVANESHWARINAGAR, MARIYAPPANAPALYA, K.P.AGRAHARA, MAGADI ROAD, BENGALURU-560 023.
2 . J.ARUMUGAM, S/O V.JEEVARATHINAM, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/AT NO.13/1A, 6TH CROSS, BHUVANESHWARINAGAR, MARIYAPPANAPALYA, K.P.AGRAHARA, MAGADI ROAD, BENGALURU-560 023. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.H.T.NARAYAN, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN O.S.NO.4459/2011 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HON’BLE XVIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL JUDGE, AT BENGALURU [CCH-10] AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING – B GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Petitioner being the plaintiff in a specific performance suit in O.S.No.4459/2011, is invoking the jurisdiction of this court for assailing the order dated 27.01.2017, a copy whereof is at Annexure – A whereby the learned trial Judge has directed the petitioner to pay the deficit stamp duty along with penalty.
2. After service of notice, the respondent/defendants having entered appearance through their counsel, resist the Writ Petition.
3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the Petition Papers this court is of the considered opinion that relief needs to be granted because: Article 5(e)(i) of Schedule to Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957 requires levy of stamp duty on an instrument of agreement as if it is a conveyance under Article 20; however, this Article is not attracted since possession is neither delivered nor agreed to be delivered before the conveyance, going by clause 7 of the agreement dated 19.06.2009, a copy whereof is at Annexure – B.
In the above circumstances, the writ petition is favoured; impugned order is set at naught; all contentions of the parties are kept open.
No costs Sd/- JUDGE cbc
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Sri V S Prabhakar vs Sri J Sundaram

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
16 October, 2019
Judges
  • Krishna S Dixit