(1.) Vide impugned order dated 5.1.2015, the plaintiff respondents have been permitted to deposit stamp duty on the agreement of sale, which is an apple of discord between the parties.
(2.) Counsel for the petitioners has vehemently contended that the application of the plaintiff- respondents for permitting to deposit the stamp duty has caused serious prejudice to the defendant- petitioners as inadmissible document has been permitted to be taken on record.
(3.) Counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on Jupudi Kesava Rao v. Pulavarthi Venkata Subbarao and ors., 1971 AIR(SC) 1070.