SHRI. RAJESH Vs. SRI. H. N. NARAYANASWAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendant filed the present writ petition against the order passed by the lower appellate Court, only in respect of the observation with regard to payment of stamp duty on Rs. 4,24,960/- on the agreement dated 03.10.2016 said to have been entered into between the respondent and one C. Venkatesh.

(2.) The respondent/plaintiff filed suit in O.S.No. 181/2017 for permanent injunction against the defendant, restraining the defendant, his agents, assignees, coolies, workers, anybody claiming by or through him, from continuing the construction work within the suit schedule property without canceling the contract in due process of law, raising various contentions. The suit was resisted by the defendant/petitioner by filing written statement. The plaintiff also filed an application for temporary injunction seeking to restrain the defendant from continuing the construction work by engaging the services of any other contractor apart from the plaintiff, reiterating the averments made in the plaint. The application was resisted by the defendant by reiterating the averments made in the written statement.

(3.) The Trial Court, considering the application and objection filed, by the order dated 31.07.2017 rejected the application for temporary injunction. Against the said order passed by the Trial Court, the plaintiff filed M.A.No.9/2017 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Gowribidanur, who after hearing both the parties, by the impugned order, dismissed the appeal. However, the lower appellate Court directed the Trial Court to collect the deficit stamp duty and penalty from the defendant on the contract agreement dated 03.10.2016 said to be entered with one C. Venkatesh. Hence, present writ petition is filed by the defendant only against the observation made by the lower appellate Court with regard to payment of deficit stamp duty and penalty.