Sri Rajappa vs M S A Aleem on 5 December, 2022

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri Rajappa vs M S A Aleem on 5 December, 2022

Bench: B M Shyam Prasad

                             -1-




 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

     DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2022

                        BEFORE
     THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD
       WRIT PETITION NO. 24101 OF 2022 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:

1.   SRI RAJAPPA
     S/O LATE CHOWDAPPA
     AGED ABOUT 83 YEARS
     R/AT ANEKAL GRAMA
     ANEKAL TALUK
     BEHIND FLORA SILK LTD
     BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 562106
     (SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED)

2.   SHIVASHANKAR REDDY
     S/O NAGARAJ REDDY
     AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
     R/AT NO 3, 20TH CROSS
     7TH MAIN. 2ND STAGE
     BTM LAYOUT
     BENGALURU 560076

                                            ...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. RAJESWARA P N., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.   M S A ALEEM
     S/O LT SYED ABBAS
     AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS
     R/AT NO 36, D COSTA SQUARE
     2ND CROSS, COOKE TOWN
     THOMOS TOWN PO
     BENGALURU 560084
                                -2-




    ALSO CHAIRMAN OF FLORA SILKS LTD
    NO 345/1
    TELUGARAHALLI MAIN ROAD
    ANEKAL
    (SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED)

                                              ...RESPONDENT

      THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR
RECORDS IN O.S.NO.513/2007 ON THE FILE OF HONBLE
PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT ANEKAL;
SET ASIDE THE ORDER DTD 15.10.2022 VIDE ANNX-A IN
O.S.NO.513/2007 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR
CIVIL    JUDGE    AND    JMFC    AT  ANEKAL,   AND
CONSEQUENTLY DISMISS THE SUIT.

    THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
                           ORDER

This petition is by the defendants in O.S.No.513/2007 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Anekal (for short, 'the civil Court'). The petitioner has impugned the civil Court's order dated 15.10.2022. This Court, while dismissing the respondent's petition in W.P.No.3648/2020 calling in question the civil Court's order on the deficit stamp duty and penalty, had granted three [3] months. The civil Court by the impugned order has permitted the respondent-plaintiff to pay the deficit stamp -3- duty beyond the time stipulated by this Court in W.P.No.3648/2020.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this three [3] months must be computed from the date of disposal of the writ petition in W.P.No.3648/2020 viz., 14.09.2021 but the tender is beyond the period allowed by this Court. However, the civil Court has accepted the belated tender observing that the deficit stamp duty and penalty is substantially on the higher side and the true import of this Court's order granting three [3] months time is only to ensure no adverse orders are passed in the said period. This Court, in the circumstances in which the civil Court has exercised its discretion, is not persuaded to opine that there is any reason for this Court's interference and as such, the petition stands rejected.

Sd/-

JUDGE RB

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court