Skip to content


Maula Bux and ors. Vs. Munna Lal and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtAllahabad
Decided On
Reported inAIR1939All205
AppellantMaula Bux and ors.
RespondentMunna Lal and ors.
Excerpt:
- - ho therefore recommended that the document be impounded and the deficiency in duty be realized before admitting the evidence. the instrument clearly comes within the;.....appears that the inspector of stamps, while inspecting the records in the court of the additional civil judge of ballia, came across a document (paper no. 8) in suit no. 32 of 1935 and he was of the opinion that the said document was ii, bend. ho therefore recommended that the document be impounded and the deficiency in duty be realized before admitting the evidence. the learned additional civil judge was however of the opinion that the document was only an agreement and the stamp paid on it was sufficient. thereupon the inspector of stamps acting as a collector has applied to us under section 61(1) and we propose to consider whether the instrument in question is a bend as contended by the revenue authorities or an agreement as hold by the additional civil judge. the document is in the.....
Judgment:

Bajpai, J.

1. This is a reference under Section 61(1), Stamp Act, by the Inspector of Stamps who, under a Government Notification, has been invested with the powers of a Collector. It appears that the Inspector of Stamps, while inspecting the records in the Court of the Additional Civil Judge of Ballia, came across a document (Paper No. 8) in Suit No. 32 of 1935 and he was of the opinion that the said document was ii, bend. Ho therefore recommended that the document be impounded and the deficiency in duty be realized before admitting the evidence. The learned Additional Civil Judge was however of the opinion that the document was only an agreement and the stamp paid on it was sufficient. Thereupon the Inspector of Stamps acting as a Collector has applied to us under Section 61(1) and we propose to consider whether the instrument in question is a bend as contended by the revenue authorities or an agreement as hold by the Additional Civil Judge. The document is in the form of an agreement between two parties, but in its earlier portion it recites that a sum of Rs. 6794-7.0 is duo as principal and interest from the first party to the second party and the first party covenants that out of Rs. 6794-7-0 a sum of Rs. 794-7-0 will be paid by 25th April 1935 and the balance will be paid labor on in instalments. There is also a covenant for the payment of interest. The document is attested by witnesses. The other covenants in the document are in the nature of agreements pure and simple.

2. A bond under Section 2(5) includes any instrument attested by a witness and not payable to order or bearer whereby a person obliges himself to pay money to another. The instrument before us is attested by witnesses; it is not payable to order or bearer and under it the first party obliges himself to pay money to the second party. The instrument clearly comes within the; definition of a bend. Under Section 35, Stamp Act, this document can be admitted in evidence only on payment of the deficit duty of Rs. 34 and a penalty in the sum of Rs. 340. The above is our declaration under Section 61(2), Stamp Act, and we direct that a. copy of our judgment should be sent to the Inspector of Stamps and to the learned Additional Civil Judge of Ballia. We are informed by Mr. Chaturbhuj Sahai, who appears for the person who filed the document that so far as he is aware, the document is still in the possession of the Court.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //