V. PRAKASH Vs. VENKATARAMANAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner who is plaintiff in O.S. No. 597/2006 before the Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.), Magadi is questioning the legality and correctness of the order passed by the court below impounding the document and calling upon the petitioner/plaintiff to pay the duty and penalty as contemplated under Section 33 of the Karnataka Stamp Act (for short 'the Act'). The petitioner has filed the suit to recovery part of sale consideration paid by him to the respondent and an agreement of sale dated 13.9.2004 wherein he had agreed to purchase the property involved therein for a sum of Rs. 3,85,000/ - and paid a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/ - as advance sale consideration. He agreed to pay the balance sale consideration of Rs. 2,84,000/ - within 5 months from the date of the agreement. The document discloses that possession of the property has been delivered to the petitioner - plaintiff. The document is drawn on Rs. 100/ - stamp paper. When the suit was filed for recovery of advance sale consideration, the trial Court has called upon the petitioner to pay the stamp duty. Therefore, the present petition is filed.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner contends that document can be impounded under Section 33 of the Act when the party produces the same at the time of marking and therefore he contends that the order passed by the court below even before the document is sought to be tendered in evidence, is illegal.

(3.) IN view of the judgment of this Court in Dr. S. Vidya's case referred to supra, the Writ Petition requires to be allowed. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed. The matter is remanded to the trial Court for fresh consideration in accordance with law.