Skip to content


Vidya Wati Vs. Babu Ram and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided On
Case NumberCivil Revn. No. 1354 of 1971
Judge
Reported inAIR1974P& H275
ActsIndian Stamp Act, 1899 - Sections 2(16)
AppellantVidya Wati
RespondentBabu Ram and ors.
Excerpt:
.....enacted shall have full operation and there would be no impediment. it is well settled that the definition of judgment in section 2(9) of c.p.c., is much wider and more liberal, intermediary or interlocutory judgment fall in the category of orders referred to clause (a) to (w) of order 43, rule 1 and also such other orders which poses the characteristic and trapping of finality and may adversely affect a valuable right of a party or decide an important aspect of a trial in an ancillary proceeding. amended section 100-a of the code clearly stipulates that where any appeal from an original or appellate decree or order is heard and decided by a single judge of a high court, no further appeal shall lie. even otherwise, the word judgment as defined under section 2(9) means a statement..........and penalty on a document which has been found to come within the definition of a 'lease' as given in section 2(16) of the indian stamp act, 1899. since the word 'lease' is defined in the said act, shri jain is not justified in trying to import any definition or interpretation clause from any other act. none of the decisions relied upon by him are under the stamp act. i have no reasons to disagree with the learned trial court that the document marked 'a' comes within the definition of a ' lease' as given in section 2(16) of the stamp act and that it is liable to stamp duty under article 35 of schedule-1 to that act. no exception can, therefore, be taken to the order that has been challenged by the plaintiff in this revision petition.2. the petition is accordingly dismissed shri.....
Judgment:
ORDER

1. During the trial of her suit for a declaration, the petitioner has been ordered to pay deficiency of stamp and penalty on a document which has been found to come within the definition of a 'lease' as given in Section 2(16) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. Since the word 'lease' is defined in the said Act, Shri Jain is not justified in trying to import any definition or interpretation clause from any other Act. None of the decisions relied upon by him are under the Stamp Act. I have no reasons to disagree with the learned trial Court that the document marked 'A' comes within the definition of a ' lease' as given in Section 2(16) of the Stamp Act and that it is liable to stamp duty under Article 35 of Schedule-1 to that Act. No exception can, therefore, be taken to the order that has been challenged by the plaintiff in this revision petition.

2. The petition is accordingly dismissed Shri Chaudhry, the learned counsel for the respondent, does not press for any order as to costs incurred by his client in this Court.

3. Petition dismissed.


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