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

2023 Supreme(AP) 1606

K. MANMADHA RAO
Gouram Sakunthalamma – Appellant
Versus
Gouram Shyamalamma – Respondent


ORDER :

(K. Manmadha Rao, J.)

This Revision Petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is preferred against the order, dated 10.01.2020, in I.A.No.576 of 2019 in O.S.No.216 of 2008 on the file of the Court of Additional Senior Civil Judge, Anantapuramu, filed under order XIII, rule 3 read with Section 151 of C.P.C to reject Ex.A8 for non-payment of sufficient stamp duty and penalty which is inadmissible in evidence.

2. Heard Mr.Harish Kumar Rasineni, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.Lakshmikanth Reddy Desai, learned counsel for the respondents.

3. The defendants 7 to 9 in the trial court have filed the application to reject the Ex.A8 for non-payment of sufficient stamp duty and penalty, which is inadmissible in evidence. Further it is contended that the plaintiff filed the suit for declaration and for grant of permanent injunction. She filed Chief Affidavit as PW1 and marked document dated 10.01.1976 as Ex.A8 on the assumption that the office of the court collected stamp duty penalty properly and in fact the alleged collection of stamp duty and its assessment is not property because the document relates to permanent sale agreement for value Rs.1,500/- and poss

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