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

2010 Supreme(Kar) 995

A.N.VENUGOPALA GOWDA
H. Krishnappa – Appellant
Versus
M. D. Ashwathnarayan Singh – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:T.M. Venkata Reddy, Advocate.
For the Respondent:V.B. Shivakumar, Advocate.

Judgment :-

1. The respondent/plaintiff has filed O.S.No. 9714/2006 in the City Civil Court, Bangalore, against the petitioner/defendant for a decree granting specific performance of the agreement to sell dated 25.11.2004 and for permanent injuction in respect of the property described in the plaint schedule. The petitioner has filed written statement and has contested the suit. Issues having been raised based on the material pleadings, trial of the suit has taken place.

2. Petitioner filed I.A No.3 under Sections 33 & 34 of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957 read with Section 151 of CPC to impound the original agreement of sale dated 25.11.2004 marked as Ex.P-1 on the ground that, the same is insufficiently stamped. The respondent has filed statement of objections. The trial court has dismissed I.A No.3. The defendant has filed this writ petition questioning the said order.

3. Sri T.M. Venkata Reddy, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner contended that, the trial court has committed a manifest error in relying upon the decisions reported at ILR 2007 Kar 2786 and AIR 2007 SC 637 and in holding that Ex.P-1 cannot be impounded and in dismissing I.A.No.3. Learned counsel submits th
















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