SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2002 Supreme(AP) 960

G.BIKSHAPATHY
S. Vijayalakshmi – Appellant
Versus
Boyapali Santhamma – Respondent


G. BIKSHAPATHY, J.

( 1 ) THIS revision is filed against the order passed by the learned Additional District judge, Madanapalle in O. S. No. 6 of 1999 dated 3-12-2001.

( 2 ) THE suit was filed by the plaintiff directing the defendant to receive the balance of sale consideration of rs. 1,49,000/- in turn the defendant as per the terms of the suit agreement dated 6-11-1997 has to execute the Sale deed. Another relief is also framed directing the defendant to deliver the possession of the plaint schedule property to the plaintiff or to the persons specified by the plaintiff.

( 3 ) DURING the course of trial, the plaintiff tried to introduce the agreement of sale dated 6-11-1997 and mark the same as the suit document. But the same was objected by the defendants on the ground that it is not properly stamped. The lower court after hearing the learned counsel for the parties held that since the possession was delivered in pursuance of the agreement, it requires necessary stamp duty. The said order is assailed in this revision.

( 4 ) THE learned counsel appearing for the petitioner however submits that as far as the execution of the document is concerned it is not in dispute but the question







Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top