Disposed
Saroj Kumar Mohanty v. Kishore Kumar Mohanty
Orissa HCRVWPET/18/2019
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
25.03.2019 Heard Mr. P. K. Lenka, learned…
What the court decided
AI extract
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
RVWPET No.18 of 2019
Mr. Lenka, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by judgment dated 11.08.2017, passed in CMP No.1575 of 2016, this Court disposed of the petition with an observation that in the event of non-registration of the compromise decree, the same shall not be given effect to and shall not have any binding effect. Subsequently, an application for modification of the judgment has been filed. The same was disposed of on 11.08.2017. It was held that “it is open to the petitioner to pay the required stamp duty, whereafter the compromise decree shall be sent for registration”. He further submits that in the meantime final decree has been set aside by the appellate court. Thereafter the execution case has to be dropped. Thus the order is required to be reviewed.
By judgment dated 11.8.2017, passed in CMP No.1575 of 2016, this Court held that the compromise decree which creates for the first time right, title or interest of the immovable property in favour of J.Dr. No.2 value of which is more than Rs.100/- would require registration.
In view of the same, this Court disposes of
uks
2
the review application with an observation that whenever final decree proceeding shall be initiated, the petitioner shall pay the stamp duty on the compromise decree.
Accordingly the petition is disposed of.
……………………… Dr.A.K.Rath, J.
3
5.7.2018
uks
4
5
BK B
Petitioner
Dr. J.Dr. No.2
Dr. A.K. Rath
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court