1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners.

2. The petitioners-defendants are before this Court being aggrieved by the order impugned at Annexure-A to the writ petition. The defendants have preferred I.A.No.6 under Sections 33 and 34 of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short) seeking to impound Exs.P12 and 13. The Court below vide impugned order dated 27.07.2017 has been pleased to reject the same on the premise that though they are insufficiently stamped, they being already admitted in evidence and marked as Exhibits, the same cannot be impounded.

3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the documents are compulsorily registerable documents and are to be construed as insufficiently stamped on account of the fact that possession came to be delivered under the said documents. The same came to be resisted by the respondent, who is the plaintiff in the Court below.

4. The Court below after considering the respective stand of the parties has been pleased to reject the application by placing reliance on the ruling reported in 2011 (2) KCCR 1478 rendered in the case of Smt. Vijayalakshmi vs. Sri. Nagaraju. This Co