TIRATH S. THAKUR, J.

( 1 ) THE short question that falls for consideration in these revision-petitions is whether the trial Court was justified in demanding the payment of duty and penalty in terms of S. 34 of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957 on an unregistered and unstamped sale deed relied upon by the petitioner as a condition precedent for letting the same into evidence in proof of a collateral transaction. The question arises in the following circumstances :

( 2 ) THE petitioner is plaintiff in O. S. No. 899/1997 pending trial before the Civil Judge (Jr. Dvn.), Mysore. The suit prays for a decree for permanent injunction restraining the defendants and persons acting on their behalf from interfering with the plaintiff's possession and enjoyment of the suit property. The title to the suit property is traced to an unregistered sale deed dated 20-12-1989 allegedly executed by the father of the plaintiff in his favour. The sale deed was in the course of the evidence of the plaintiff produced by him to show his possession over the property. Since the document is unregistered, an objection to its admissibility was raised which the Court below overruled in terms of its order dated 18-1-2002

Click Here to Read the rest of this document