MARY GRACE EDUCATION CENTRE Vs. MARTIN MARIA DOSS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) THE petitioner was the plaintiff before the Trial Court. The suit was one for specific performance of contract. The petitioner had produced one agreement and deeds which extended the agreement of sale. The defendants who had entered appearance and contested the suit, had filed an application to bring to the attention of the court that the agreements produced by the plaintiff were not duly stamped, in that, it was claimed that possession had been delivered and the plaint averments also disclosed that possession had been delivered and that the plaintiff was in possession, in which event, the documents attracted stamp duty as if there was a conveyance.

(3.) AS contemplated under the Schedule to the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957, though the agreements disclosed that possession had been delivered, the plaint prayer was for delivery of possession and specific performance of contract. The application having been filed by the defendant, the court below had accepted the contention and held that the agreement was not duly stamped and had chosen to refer the matter to the Sub -Registrar for valuation of the duty and penalty payable and thereafter has called upon the plaintiff to pay the duty and penalty, and when the plaintiff failed to pay the duty and penalty, the suit itself was dismissed. It is that which has been challenged in the present proceeding.