In Brief
The appellant purchased agricultural land under an agreement dated June 1999 and was put in possession by the respondent. When the appellant filed for injunction to prevent dispossession, the respondent challenged the agreement as insufficiently stamped under the Karnataka Stamp Act. The trial court ordered the appellant to pay the deficit stamp duty plus a penalty of ten times the deficit amount. The Supreme Court held that because the respondent had requested the document be referred to the District Registrar for determination of penalty, the trial court could not unilaterally impose the maximum penalty. The District Registrar, not the court, has discretionary authority to determine the penalty amount based on circumstances like fraud and financial position. The Court set aside the automatic penalty and directed the District Registrar to determine the appropriate penalty.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.