KUSUMALAXMI NARAYANA Vs. PINNA KARUNAKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. J.Aswin Kumar, learned counsel representing Mr. Bethepu Dileep Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ghanashyamdas Mandhani, learned counsel, representing Mr. Bankatlal Mandhani, learned counsel appearing for respondents.

(2.) The present Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the order dtd. 20/11/2023 passed in O.S. No.13 of 2012 by the I Additional District Judge at Hanumakonda.

(3.) Vide the aforesaid order, learned trial Court held that the petitioner herein/defendant No.4 is liable to pay requisite stamp duty since the document i.e. agreement of sale dtd. 7/9/2011 is considered as sale deed. Thus, the objection raised by the plaintiffs that the subject agreement of sale is not admissible in accordance with law since requisite stamp duty is not paid is sustained. Thus, the trial Court directed the petitioner/defendant No.4 to pay requisite stamp duty on the agreement of sale dtd. 7/9/2011 for the purpose of adducing the same in evidence.