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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 9004

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
SMT. ANITHA SHANTI VAZ – Appellant
Versus
SMT. NOOTHAN SHETTY – Respondent


CAV ORDER

This writ petition is filed assailing the order dated 06.12.2023 passed in O.S.No.229/2023 by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Moodbidri, Dakshina Kannada District (hereinafter referred to as the 'Trial Court').

2. The brief facts leading to filing of this case are that the respondent No.1 filed a suit in O.S.No.229/2023 against the petitioner and others for the relief of specific performance of the agreement dated 23.06.2018 and other reliefs. The petitioner-defendant No.4 contested the proceedings by denying the assertion of the plaintiff. The Trial Court recorded the evidence of the plaintiff. At that stage, the petitioner-defendant No.4 objected to marking of the agreement of sale dated 23.06.2018 on the ground that the said instrument is insufficiently stamped and is not registered. The plaintiff filed a memo dated 11.08.2023 stating that the possession of the property was with the plaintiff prior to the agreement and she is only liable to pay the stamp duty as per Article 5(e)(ii) of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The petitioner-defendant No.4 objected to the memo filed by the plaintiff. The Trial Court, under the impugned order up

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