JUDGMENT : VINEET KOTHARI, J. 1. The petitioner-plaintiff-Archdiocese of Bangalore, a religious charitable Trust has filed this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India aggrieved by the order dated 23-1-2017 passed by the learned Trial Court directing the plaintiff to impound the Agreement of Sale dated 1-9-2008 in view of Section 34 of the Karnataka Stamp Duty Act, 19571 (for short, 'Act') and directing the District Registrar/Commissioner of Stamp, Chickballapur District, Chickballapur to calculate the deficit stamp duty and penalty under Section 39(1)(b) of the said Act on the sale consideration of Rs. 89,81,500/- and recover the same from the plaintiff. The reasons assigned by the Trial Court are quoted below for ready reference: "4. Therefore, under the agreement of sale i.e. suit document dated 1-9-2008 defendants have handed over the possession to the plaintiff. That as per Article 5(e)(ii) of Karnataka Stamp Duty Act, 1957 not applicable to the case on the hand because as the physical possession of the suit schedule property delivered as per the contract of the agreement of sale at page 12. Hence, which attracts or false under Article 5(e)(i) of Karnataka Stamp Duty Act. 5. Thus, the plaintiff has to pay the Stamp Duty as per Article 20 of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957 as conveyance on the market value of the consideration amount. Hence, what ever the argument filed in writing by the learned Counsel for the plaintiff is not considerable. 6. The consideration amount in the agreement of sale is Rs. 89,81,500/-. Therefore, it is considered that the suit agreement is insufficiently stamped." 2. The learned Counsel for the plaintiff/petitioner has drawn the attention of the Court towards the Agreement of Sale in question. 6. The consideration amount in the agreement of sale is Rs. 89,81,500/-. Therefore, it is considered that the suit agreement is insufficiently stamped." 2. The learned Counsel for the plaintiff/petitioner has drawn the attention of the Court towards the Agreement of Sale in question. With reference to Clause 5(iii) of the said Agreement, he submitted that possession of the suit property in question was not at all handed over to the purchaser/plaintiff or agreed to be handed over before the execution of the said agreement and therefore, the Stamp Duty of such Agreement would be payable as per Article 5(e)(ii) of the Schedule of the Act, which has been paid already and therefore, the alleged deficit Stamp Duty could not be demanded on the basis of the value as per clause (i) of Article 5(e) of the said Schedule as if payable on the Deed of Conveyance and therefore, the learned Trial Court has erred in impounding the said document and directing the concerned authority to determine the deficit stamp duty and require the plaintiff-Trust to pay the same with penalty. 3. The learned Trial Court appears to have relied upon the extract of the said agreement of sale dated 1-9-2008 with reference to the permission given for construction of the compound wall by the purchaser-plaintiff-Trust (page 12 in para 10 of the said agreement) wherein the vendor has agreed for purchaser to raise a compound wall around the schedule property at their cost and in the event of termination of the agreement, the vendor was to bear the expenses incurred for the construction of the said compound wall around the schedule property. Taking this stipulation in the Agreement as a fact of possession have been delivered to the plaintiff/purchaser, the learned Trial Court appears to have proceeded to direct the concerned authority to demand Deficit Stamp Duty. 4. The learned Trial Court appears to have escaped to note para 5 of the said agreement from which it clearly appears that the possession of the schedule property in question was agreed to be handed over only at the time of execution and registration of the deed of sale and in any event the vendor fails to deliver the vacant possession, the purchaser had the option to terminate the said Agreement. 5. Paras 5 and 10 of the agreement are quoted below for ready reference: "5. 5. Paras 5 and 10 of the agreement are quoted below for ready reference: "5. The purchaser shall have the option to terminate this Agreement in the event of. -- (i) the Vendors failing to make out a good and marketable title free of all encumbrances, charges and liens to the reasonable satisfaction of the purchaser of its Counsel and/or failing to cure the defects that may be discovered by the purchaser as provided in Clause 4 hereinabove; or (ii) the purchaser discovering that the Schedule Properties are subject-matter of any acquisition proceedings pending or to be initiated by the State Government or other statutory authorities; or (iii) the Vendors failing to deliver vacant possession of the Schedule properties at the time of execution and registration of the deed of sale. ............. 10. The Vendors shall have to conduct the Survey of the Schedule Properties from the Competent Department and to fix up the boundaries as per the survey. Further, the Vendors have no objection to construct compound wall around the Schedule Properties by the Purchaser and agreed to render necessary assistance in this regard. However, the Purchaser agreed to bear all the costs to construct of the compound wall around the Schedule Properties. In the event of termination of this agreement of sale, the Vendors shall have to bear the expenses incurred towards the construction of compound wall around the Schedule Properties." 6. The relevant extract of Article 5(e) (ii) of the Schedule of the Act is quoted below for ready reference: Article No. Description of instrument Proper Stamp Duty (e) If relating to sale of immovable property wherein part performance of the contract.- (i) Possession of the property is delivered of is agreed to be delivered (before) execution the conveyance (ii) possession of the property is not delivered Same duty as a conveyance (No.20) on the market value of the property : Provided that, where a deed of cancellation of earlier agreement is executed by and between the same parties in respect of the same property and if proper stamp duty has been paid on such agreement then the duty on such "deed of cancellation" shall not exceed rupees five hundred. Ten paise for every one hundred rupees of part thereof on the market value equal to the amount of consideration subject to a maximum of rupees twenty thousand but not less than rupees five hundred: 7. Ten paise for every one hundred rupees of part thereof on the market value equal to the amount of consideration subject to a maximum of rupees twenty thousand but not less than rupees five hundred: 7. In view of the aforesaid, the present writ petition deserves to be allowed setting aside the impugned order dated 23-1-2017 of the Trial Court. The matter is remitted back to the Trial Court to decide the said matter again in accordance with law. The writ petition is accordingly allowed and the impugned order dated 23-1-2017 is set aside. No order as to costs.