SRI. GREGORY v. Location: HIGH

Judgment

2. SRI. BALARAM S/O LATE M. SHAMANNA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS RESIDINT AT NO.9, EV LANE S P ROAD CROSS, THIGALARPET BANGALORE-560002. RAMACHANDRA .C S/O LATE CHINNAKUTTY AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.5, VIJAYA COMPLEX BEHIND BATA SHOWROOM ST. THOMAS TOWN POST BANGALORE-560084. DECEASED REP. BY LR'S. - 2 - NC: 2026:KHC:24487 W.P. No.4528/2020 HC-KAR 2(a) KALAVATHI R W/O LATE RAMACHANDRA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS. 2(b) SANTHOSH KUMAR R S/O LATE RAMACHANDRA AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS. 2(c) VIJAYA KUMAR R S/O LATE RAMACHANDRA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS. 2(a) TO 2(c) ALL ARE R/AT. VIJAYA COMPLEX KAMANAHALLI MAIN ROAD BEHIND BATA SHOWROOM ST. THOMAS TOWN POST BANGALORE-500084. [AMENDMENT CARRIED OUT ON 30.04.2026].

4. SRI. P. BABU S/O LATE SRI. PADMANABHA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.671, PREM NIVAS GRAPES GARDAN ST. THOMAS TOWN POST KAMMANAHALLI BANGALORE-560098.

SRI. HANUMANTHA RAYAPPA AGED MAJOR RESIDING AT NO.3/1 ST JOHN STREET, 1ST CROSS KAMMANAHALLI MAIN ROAD KAMMANAHALLI BANGALORE-560084.

5. ROSE MARY W/O LGNATUUS - 3 - NC: 2026:KHC:24487 W.P. No.4528/2020 HC-KAR AGED MAJOR RESIDING AT NO.3/2 ST JOHN STREET, 1ST CROSS KAMMANAHALLI MAIN ROAD KAMMANAHALLI BANGALORE-560084. S. MUNIRAJU S/O M. SHAMANNA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS. S. NARAYANA S/O M. SHAMANNA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS. BOTH RESIDING AT NO.43 HEERACHAND LAYOUT JEEVANAHALLI, COX TOWN BANGALORE-560005. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (STAMPS) AND DISTRICT REGISTRAR FOR SOCIETIES GANDHINAGARA REGISTRATION DISTRICT NO.17, MARUTHI PLAZA 2ND MAIN ROAD VAYALI KAVAL EXTENSION BANGALORE-560003.

8. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. N. NAGARAJA, ADV., FOR R5 HCGP FOR R8 R3, R4, R6 & R7 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED V/O/DTD:03.11.2025, NOTICE TO R1 IS H/S V/O/DTD:04.03.2026, NOTICE TO R2 (a to c) IS H/S) - - - THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT IN THE NATURE OF WRIT - 4 - NC: 2026:KHC:24487 W.P. No.4528/2020 HC-KAR QUASHING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED XII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSION JUDGE BANGALORE DATED

12.11.2019 AND ON 03.02.2020 IN O.S.NO.7730/2013 VIDE ANNEXURE-G TO THE WRIT PETITION AND THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DY. COMMISSIONER (STAMPS) AND DISTRICT REGISTRAR GANDHINAGARA REGISTRATION DISTRICT I.E. , R-8 IN CASE NO.GNR/ADJ/125/2019-20 DATED 29.11.2019 VIDE ANNEXURE-H TO THE WRIT PETITION & ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL ORDER This writ petition is filed challenging the orders dated

12.11.2019 and 03.02.2020 passed in O.S.No.7730/2013 by the XII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (for short, 'the Trial Court').

2. Sri.B.M.Siddappa, learned counsel petitioner submits that the petitioner is the plaintiff in the suit and he has produced Ex.P1-copy of the General Power of Attorney (for short, 'GPA') which was marked in the - 5 - NC: 2026:KHC:24487 W.P. No.4528/2020 HC-KAR evidence and later the defendant No.2 raised an objection with regard to the insufficiency of stamp duty on Ex.P1. It is submitted that the Trial Court, vide order dated

12.11.2019 impounded the document and referred it to the Gandhinagar Sub-Registrar to collect the duty and penalty. It is further submitted that once the Court marks the document, the remedy to the defendant is to challenge the said order under Section 58 of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957 (for short, 'the Act') as provided under Section 35 of the Act. It is also submitted that the petitioner should have an opportunity to dispute the calculation arrived at by the concerned Registrar and the Trial Court is required to hear him and then direct to pay the duty and penalty. In support of his contentions, he placed reliance on the following decisions: (a) JAVER CHAND AND ORS V PUKHRAJ SURANA1 (b) SHYAMAL KUMAR ROY V SUSHIL KUMAR AGARWAL2 ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed-in-part. (ii) The impugned order dated 12.09.2019 passed in O.S.No.7730/2013 by the XII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, is upheld. - 17 - NC: 2026:KHC:24487 W.P. No.4528/2020 HC-KAR (iii) The petitioner is permitted to file objections to the calculation arrived at by the Sub-Registrar, Gandhinagar, in his order dated 29.11.2019. (iv) The Trial Court shall consider the objection filed by the petitioner and take a decision with regard to the correctness of the calculation arrived at by the Sub-Registrar, Gandhinagar, in his order dated 29.11.2019. No order as to costs. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE RV List No.: 2 Sl No.: 6