##PAGE1##

- 1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:17354 RFA No. 962 of 2019

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026

BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 962 OF 2019 (SP)

BETWEEN:

SRI S MANJUNATHA, SON OF LATE SIDDALINGAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, RESIDING AT CHAMUNDIGUDDA,

SIDDAPURA VILLAGE, NEELAGONDANAHALLI GRAMA PANCHAYATH,

KOLALA HOBLI, KORATAGERE, TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572129,

ALSO AT NO.52, IST MAIN ROAD,

NANJUNDESWARANAGARA, NANDHINI LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560096.

…APPELLANT (BY MISS ARCHANA T V, ADVOCATE FOR Dig itally

SRI T N VISWANATHA, ADVOCATE)

signed by C HONNUR SAB AND:

Location:

HIGH COURT OF 1. SMT GANGAMMA, KARNATAKA DAUGHTER OF LATE CHANNAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, RESIDING AT IRAKASANDRA COLONY POST,

KOLALA HOBLI, KORATAGERE TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572129.

2. SRI JAYARUDRAPPA, S/O LATE CHANNAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT IRKASADRA COLONY POST,

##PAGE2##

- 2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:17354 RFA No. 962 of 2019

HC-KAR

KOLALA HOBLI, KORATAGERE TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572129.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI THONTADHARYA R K, ADVOCATE FOR

SRI P B AJIT, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2)

THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 R/W ORDER

41 RULE 1 OF THE CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 7.03.2019 PASSED IN O.S.NO.7/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MADHUGIRI, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR SPECIFIC

PERFORMANCE AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

ORAL JUDGMENT

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the

appellant and the learned counsel appearing for the

respondents.

2. The present appeal is against a judgment and

decree dated 07.03.2019 passed in O.S. No.7/2013 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Madhugiri, a suit for specific performance, wherein the Trial Court has dismissed the

suit. The plaintiff is before this Court.

##PAGE3##

- 3 -

NC: 2026:KHC:17354 RFA No. 962 of 2019

HC-KAR

3. The suit for specific performance is based on

the alleged agreement for sale dated 09.11.2012. The execution of the agreement is disputed by the defendants. In addition, the defendants have raised the following two

contentions:

a) The agreement is not properly stamped.

b) The agreement is not duly registered.

4. Learned counsel for the plaintiff/appellant would

submit that the document is duly stamped on 01.02.2013 by submitting the same before the jurisdictional Sub- Registrar. It is urged that, the agreement for sale though not registered and required to be registered because of the clause in the agreement which recorded delivery of possession in favour of the plaintiff, is nevertheless admissible in evidence in a suit for specific performance

under Section 49 of the Indian Registration Act, 1908. 5. Learned counsel for the plaintiff would urge

that, the defendants have not cross-examined the plaintiff

##PAGE4##

- 4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:17354 RFA No. 962 of 2019

HC-KAR

or his witnesses and have not led the evidence. And this being the factual position, the Trial Court could not have held that agreement for sale is not proved and that

readiness and willingness is not established.

6. The statement relating to readiness and

willingness in the examination-in-chief is not controverted by the defendants. Thus, urged that the appeal be allowed and judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court be set

aside.

7. Learned counsel for the defendants would urge

that the defendant filed an application to impound the document i.e. agreement for sale on the premise that the agreement for sale is not sufficiently stamped and said application was rejected and the document is marked in evidence and said orders were called in question by filing

Writ Petition No.8280/2017 and W.P. No.57827/2016. 8. It is further submitted that in one writ petition

there was an interim order of stay and the

##PAGE5##

- 5 -

NC: 2026:KHC:17354 RFA No. 962 of 2019

HC-KAR

defendants/respondents carried the impression that, the stay order is until further orders a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document