SURESH BHATIA Vs. GULLAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has preferred this writ petition challenging the order passed by the trial Court impounding the Power of Attorney which was sought to be marked by the plaintiff and directing him to pay duty and penalty.

(2.) The plaintiff has filed a suit for specific performance of the agreement of sale against the defendants.

(3.) The trial Court after considering the rival contentions and looking into documents produced in the case concluded that the agreement of sale, the power of attorney, affidavit, confirmation deed, receipts, all have simultaneously been executed. All these documents have to be construed as contemporaneous transactions. Thus, the Power of Attorney is executed for consideration and it is insufficiently stamped. Exercising the powers under Sections 33 and 34 of the Karnataka Stamp Act, the trial court has impounded the document, directed the plaintiff to pay stamp duty of Rs.90,055/-(Rs.90,155/- duty payable minus Rs.100/- stamp duty already paid) and Rs.9,00,550/- as penalty. Aggrieved by the said order, the plaintiff has preferred this writ petition.