Case Note & Summary
The case involves a challenge by the defendant (petitioner) against an interlocutory order dated 02.08.2016 passed by the Court of the Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore in OS No.5999/2012. The order directed the parties to proceed with the case after the defendant failed to deposit stamp duty calculated by the office. The petitioner contended that the calculation of stamp duty and penalty by the trial court's office was not in accordance with the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957. The core legal issue was whether a Judge other than a High Court Judge can delegate the duty of examining and impounding instruments under Section 33 of the Act to any other officer. The High Court, exercising jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, examined the provisions of Section 33, particularly sub-sections (2) and (3), which empower only a Judge of the High Court to delegate such duties. The Court held that the delegation by the Additional City Civil Judge to the office was invalid. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the trial court was directed to examine the instrument and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. The writ petitions were allowed.
Headnote
A) Stamp Act - Delegation of Power - Section 33 of Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957 - Impounding of Instruments - The question was whether a Judge other than a High Court Judge can delegate the duty of examining and impounding instruments under Section 33 to any other officer. The Court held that only a Judge of the High Court can delegate such duty under Section 33(2) and (3) of the Act. The impugned order passed by the Additional City Civil Judge delegating the calculation of stamp duty to the office was set aside. (Paras 1-4) B) Civil Procedure - Interlocutory Order - Writ Petition under Article 227 - The petitioner challenged an interlocutory order dated 02.08.2016 in OS No.5999/2012 passed by the Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore. The Court allowed the writ petitions and set aside the order, directing the trial court to examine the instrument and pass orders in accordance with law. (Paras 2-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a Judge, other than a Judge of the High Court, is empowered to delegate the duty of examining and impounding any instrument under Section 33 of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957 to any other officer?
Final Decision
The writ petitions are allowed. The impugned order dated 02.08.2016 passed by the Court of the Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore in OS No.5999/2012 is set aside. The trial court is directed to examine the instrument and pass orders in accordance with law.
Law Points
- Delegation of power under Section 33 of Karnataka Stamp Act
- 1957
- only by High Court Judge
- Impounding of instruments
- Interpretation of Section 33(2) and (3)
- Article 227 of Constitution of India
