Judgement

SHAH, J.: The respondents entered into a contract with Hindustan Steel Ltd. for "raising, stacking, carting and loading into wagons limestone at Nandini Mines. Dispute which arose between the parties was referred to arbitration, pursuant to Cl. 61 of the agreement. The arbitrators differed, and the dispute was referred to an umpire who made and published his award on April 19, 1967. The umpire filed the award in the Court of the District Judge, Rajandgaon in the State of Madhya Pradesh and gave notice of the filing of the award to the parties to the dispute. On July 14, 1967, the appellant filed an application for setting aside the award under Sections 30 and 33 of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940. One of the contentions raised by the appellants was that the award was unstamped and on that account "invalid and illegal and liable to be set aside". The respondents then applied to the District Court that the award be impounded and validated by levy of stamp duty and penalty. By order dated September 29, 1967, the District Judge directed that the award be impounded. He then called upon the respondents to pay the appropriate stamp duty on the award and penalty and directed that an authenticated copy of the instrument be sent to the Collector, Durg, together with a certificate in writing stating the receipt of the amount of duty and penalty. Against that order the appellant moved the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction. The High Court rejected the petition and the appellant appeals to this Court with special leave.

2. It is urged by Counsel for the appellant that an instrument which is not stamped as required by the Indian Stamp Act, may, on payment of stamp duty and penalty, be admitted in evidence, but cannot be acted upon, for, "the instrument has no existence in the eye of law". Therefore, counsel urged, in proceeding to entertain the application for filing the award, the District Judge, Rajnandagaon, acted without jurisdiction.

3. The relevant provisions of the Stamp Act may be summarised. Section 8 of the Act provides:

"Subject to the provisions of this Act * * * the following instruments shall be chargeable with duty of the amount indicated in that Schedule as the proper duty therefor, respectively, that is to say-

(a) every instrument mentioned in that Schedule which, not having been previously executed by any person, is executed in India on or after the first day of July, 1899;

* * * * * * * *"

"Instrument" is defined in Section 2 (14) as including "every document by which any right or liability is, or purports to be, created , transferred, limited, extended, extinguished or recorded". An instrument is said to be "duly stamped" within the meaning of the Stamp Act when the instrument bears an adhesive or impressed stamp of not less than the proper amount and that such stamp has been affixed or used in accordance with the law for the time being in force in India: Section 2(11) Item 12 of Sch. I prescribes the stamp duty payable in respect of an award. Section 33 (1) provides, insofar as it is relevant:

"(1) Every person having by law or consent of parties authority to receive evidence * * before whom any instrument, chargeable * * with duty, is produced or comes in the performance of his functions, shall, if it appears to him that such instrument is not duly stamped, impound the same." Section 35 of the Stamp Act provides insofar as it is relevant:

"No instrument chargeable with duty shall be admitted in evidence for any purpose by any person having by law or consent of parties authority to receive evidence, or shall be acted upon, registered or authenticated by any such person or by any public officer, unless such instrument is duly stamped:

Provided that * * * * *"

Section 36 provides:

"Where an instrument has been admitted in evidence, such admission shall not, except as provided in Section 61, be called in question at any stage of the same suit or proceeding on the ground that the instrum