SEETHARAMA SHETTYversusMONAPPA SHETTY
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL No. 10039/2024
Decision Date: 02-09-2024
Disposal: Case Partly allowed
Neutral Citation: 2024INSC650

HRISHIKESH ROY*, SARASA VENKATANARAYANA BHATTI Issue for Consideration Scope of Sections 33, 34, 37, 39 of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957; whether the agreement of sale dated 29.06.1999, with a recital on delivery of possession to the appellant, conforms to the definition of conveyance under Section 2(d) read with Article 20(1) of the Schedule facts and the circumstances of the case, the penalty determined by the trial Court on the instrument instead of sending the instrument to the District Registrar for determination and collection of penalty as may be applicable is legal; whether, the said order of trial court as confirmed by the 

Summary: Englishਪੰਜਾਬੀ - PunjabiDisclaimer 
						Judgments in  regional languages are also made available alongside the English version. The translations are being done with the help of various human agencies and software tools. 
						Reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate translation.
						 
						 Hindi Judgment as published in Ucchtam Nyayalya Nirnay Patrika are reproduced under approval of Vidhi Sahitya Prakashan, Department of legislative affairs, Govt. Of India. 
						 
						Supreme Court Registry will not responsible for incorrect or inaccurate translation and  for any error, omission or discrepancy in the content of translated text. 
						The translation of Judgements is provided for general information  and shall have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement.
						If any questions arise related to the accuracy of the information/statement contained in the translated judgment,  users are advised to verify from the original judgments and also to refer to correct position of law while referring to old judgments.Visitors to the site are requested to cross check the correctness of the information on this site with the authorities concerned or consult the relevant record. The information made available here is not meant for legal evidence. Neither the Courts concerned nor the National Informatics Centre (NIC) nor the e-Committee is responsible for any data inaccuracy or delay in the updation of the data on this website. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for any damage or loss arising from the direct/indirect use of the information provided on the site. However, we shall be obliged if errors/omissions are brought to our notice for carrying out the corrections.SEETHARAMA SHETTYversusMONAPPA SHETTY-[2024] 9 S.C.R. 1662024 INSC 650Coram : HRISHIKESH ROY*, SARASA VENKATANARAYANA BHATTIIssue for Consideration Scope of Sections 33, 34, 37, 39 of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957; whether the agreement of sale dated 29.06.1999, with a recital on delivery of possession to the appellant, conforms to the definition of conveyance under Section 2(d) read with Article 20(1) of the Schedule facts and the circumstances of the case, the penalty determined by the trial Court on the instrument instead of sending the instrument to the District Registrar for determination and collection of penalty as may be applicable is legal; whether, the said order of trial court as confirmed by the