Y.N. MALLINATH Vs. SANGAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has challenged the impugned order wherein, the learned Trial Judge has levied penalty of two times the stamp duty. It is the grievance of petitioner (defendant 2) that the learned Trial Judge should have levied 10 times of stamp duty as penalty as per the provisions of Section 34 of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957.

(2.) Heard learned Counsel for parties.

(3.) The learned Counsel for petitioner would submit that the Court has no discretion in the matter of levy of penalty. The learned Counsel has relied on the judgments in the cases of J.S. Paramesh v. Smt. Indramma, 2008 5 KarLJ 502Ningappa Bharamappa Sogi v. Government of Karnataka by its Secretary, Department of Stamps and Registration and Others, 2011 ILR(Kar) 2484and J. Prakash v. Smt. M.T. Kamalamma and Another, 2008 2 KarLJ 202to contend that in the matter of levy of duty and penalty, the Courts have no discretion; stamp duty is a tax; the hardship and inconvenience caused to the party cannot be a ground to reduce duty and penalty payable in terms of Section 34 of the Karnataka Stamp Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Act").