IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU WRIT PETITION NO. 16034 OF 2022 (GM-CPC)

BETWEEN:

1. MR K M IBRAHIM SON OF MR MOHAMMED KUTTY AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS 2. MR SAINUL ABID K SON OF MR ABU AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NELLUDIKERI VILLAGE SOMWARPET TALUK KODAGU - 571253 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. HANEEF.M.H., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. MR A R SURESH SON OF LATE MR. RAGHAVAN, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT NELLUDIKERI VILLAGE, SOMWARPET TALUK, KODAGU - 571 253.

…RESPONDENT (RESPONDENT SERVED)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS WITH RESPECT TO O.S.NO.19/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT SOMWARPET KODAGU; QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD.21.6.2022 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT SOMWARPET KODAGU ON IA NO.XI IN O.S.NO.19/2019 ANNEXURE-K; DIRECT THE LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT SOMWARPET KODAGU ON IA NO.XI IN O.S.NO.19/2019 ANNEXURE-H FILED BY THE DEFENDANT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU

ORAL ORDER

1. The present petition seeks to challenge an order dated 21.06.2022 in O.S.No.19/2019 passed by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, at Somwarpet, Kodagu (hereinafter referred as ‘Impugned Order’). By the Impugned Order, an application under Section 34 of Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred as KS Act) was allowed and the document being an agreement to sell dated 10.01.2015 was impounded, giving a finding that a photocopy can be impounded under the provisions of Sections 34 to 36 KS Act.

2. The service on the respondent/defendant was effected before this Court on 08.09.2022. Despite service none has appeared for the respondent / defendant before this Court. This Court had by its order dated 16.08.2022 directed stay of the Impugned Order. Given the pendency of interim directions passed by the Court and the interim order granted, this Court deems it apposite to hear and decide the matter today.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff submits that the petitioner/plaintiff executed an Agreement to Sell dated 10.01.2015 with the respondent/defendant whereby the respondent/defendant agreed to sell 1.20 acres of land situated at Nelliahudikeri Village, Somwarpet Taluk, Kodagu District for consideration of Rs.1,05,00,000/-. He submits that an advance of Rs. 25,00,000/- was paid on the date of the execution of the agreement and the remaining amount was to be paid in installments thereafter.

4. It is the case of the petitioner/plaintiff that the respondent/defendant did not perform his part of the contract and since he was unable to obtain the title documents, the parties decided to cancel the contract and executed a Cancellation Agreement dated 19.01.2016. It is set out in the Cancellation Agreement that the amount of Rs.25,00,000/- which was taken as an advance would be refunded within three months from the date of such agreement. Since the amounts were not refunded, the petitioner/plaintiff approached the Court by filing a suit for recovery of the sum of Rs.25,00,000/-.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff further submits that during the course of cross-examination, the defendant’s witness was confronted with a copy of the Agreement to Sell and that the said Agreement to Sell was exhibited as Ex.P8. Subsequent thereto, the respondent/defendant filed an application under Section 34 of the KS Act, seeking that the agreement is insufficiently stamped and stamp duty should be paid. Thus, it is contended that the learned Trial Court passed the Impugned Order directing impounding of the photo copy of Agreement to Sell as well as affixing a penalty thereon. He further submits that the learned Trial Court has relied upon a judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Smt.Shanthi Vijaydev Vs. Sri.L.M.Rasa