GANKIDI VENKATESHWAR REDDY Vs. PODEM VEERAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner is plaintiff in O.S. No. 165 of 2014. The suit was filed for Specific Performance of contract for sale maintained against the executant as 1st defendant by also showing Manager, Punjab National Bank, Warangal Branch and Joint Sub-Registrar, Warangal (Urban) as co-defendants. Pending suit, the plaintiff maintained I.A. Nos. 1763 and 1764 of 2014 for the reliefs of temporary injunctions restraining the defendants from alienating to create any charge over the petition schedule property to the third parties and not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the schedule property respectively. The temporary injunctions mainly on the contest by the 1st defendant, so-called executant, ended in dismissal vide common order dated 30.10.2014, impugning the same these two revision applications are maintained.

(2.) Undisputedly, the sale agreement not exhibited in the suit for trial not commenced. It is a suit for Specific Performance of contract for sale in which an unregistered agreement dated 26.04.2014 is filed as a suit document. The question of impounding a document for stamp duty or deciding any requirement of registration arises while exhibiting the same, no doubt, to decide instantaneously when the matter camp for such consideration, on the Stamp duty and Registration, but for any other objections to postpone while marking subject to objection.

(3.) In this case, that stage has not been arisen as it is in the course of hearing two temporary injunction applications (supra), while dismissing the injunction applications, from the contest of 1st respondent, there was an observation saying that the sale agreement requires stamp duty as a sale/conveyance and also registration, if any.