IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY WRIT PETITION NO. 2383 OF 2023 (GM-CPC)

BETWEEN:

SRI C.P. SELVARAJ AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS S/O SRI COIL PILLAI R/AT NO.718, 'IMMANUEL HOUSE'

EX-SERVICE MEN BOLONY BANASWADI, BENGALURU - 560 043.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI LOKESH R, ADV.)

AND:

SRI K.M. RAJENDRAN S/O SRI M. KRISHNAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.3

1ST MAIN, C K C GARDEN Digitally BENGALURU - 560 027.

signed by NANDINI M S …RESPONDENT Location:

HIGH COURT (BY SRI RAJADITHYA SADASIVAN, ADV.)

OF KARNATAKA THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD 02.01.2023 VIDE ANNX-A PASSED ON MEMO FILED BY THE RESPONDENT IN O.S.NO.8000/2012 PASSED BY THE XVIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH 10), BENGALURU VIDE ANNX-A.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

ORAL ORDER

1. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is filed by defendant no.1 with a prayer to quash the order dated 01.09.2022 and the order dated 02.01.2023 passed by the Court of XVIII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru in O.S.No.8000/2012.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 3. The respondent herein had filed O.S.No.8000/2012 before the jurisdictional civil Court seeking the relief of declaration, possession and injunction. In the said suit, defendant no.1, who is the petitioner herein had filed written statement contending that the original owners of the suit schedule property namely Smt. C. Papamma, Smt. Theresamma, Sri J. Mariyappa and Sri J. Rayappa, who were in joint possession and enjoyment of suit schedule property had executed agreement for sale dated 26.08.1987 in his favour after having received the entire sale consideration and also had thereafter executed registered General Power of Attorneys dated 17.02.1988 and 09.05.1988 respectively in his favour.

4. The aforesaid registered General Power of Attorneys dated 17.08.1988 and 09.05.1988 were marked as Ex.D31 and Ex.D32 during the course of evidence of defendant no.1(DW.1). Subsequently, a memo was filed by the plaintiff raising objection for marking Ex.D31 and Ex.D.32 on the ground that the said documents were not properly stamped. The said memo was rejected by the Trial Court, which was challenged by the plaintiff before this Court in W.P.No.14887/2021. This Court vide order dated 13.04.2022 had allowed the said writ petition and the matter was remanded to the Trial Court to consider the objections raised by the plaintiff afresh in the background of relevant provisions of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957 (for short, the 'Act'). Thereafter, vide order dated 01.09.2022, the Trial Court had directed defendant no.1 to produce the original of General Power of Attorneys dated 17.02.1988 and 09.05.1988. In spite of such an order, defendant no.1 failed to produce the original of the aforesaid General Power of Attorneys and therefore vide the order impugned, the Trial Court has expunged Ex.D.31 and Ex.D.32 General Power of Attorneys dated 17.02.1988 and 09.05.1988 respectively and being aggrieved by the aforesaid orders dated 01.09.2022 and

02.01.2023 passed by the Trial Court, the petitioner is before this Court.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner having reiterated the grounds urged in the petition submits that, since Ex.D.31 and Ex.D.32 are marked before the Trial Court without objections, the plaintiff could not have raised any objection subsequently, with regard to admissibility of the said documents on the ground that the documents were insufficiently stamped and he has placed reliance on Section 35 of the Act in support of his arguments. He submits that reading of General Power of Attorneys would go to show that, no consideration has been paid under the said documents and therefore stamp duty as provided under Art