CHORUMALA KAMALA Vs. SAMANTHAPUDL INDIRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THERE is an error apparent on the face of the order passed by the learned Trial Judge. The suit is for specific performance of an agreement of sale dated 7-11-1994. The learned Judge himself has pointed out in the order under revision that the document dated 7-11-1994 is only an agreement of sale. If that is so, merely because under the agreement of sale the plaintiff was put in possession of the property, that would not entail that he should pay the stamp duty treating it as out-right sale deed.

(2.) THE CRP is allowed. THE order under revision isset aside. THE learned Trial Judge is directed to receive the plaint and proceed further in accordance with law.