( 1 ) LEAVE granted.

( 2 ) THESE appeals by special leave arise from the judgment dated 26-8-1994, of the Division Bench of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in L. P. A. Nos. 21 and 22 of 1994 titled State of M. P. and others v. Santosh Jaiswal and L. P. A. No. 21/94 titled State of M. P. and others v. Surendra Shukla. The question canvassed before the Division Bench was whether the right to catch fish in the tank granted in favour of the appellants was in the nature of a lease or licence, an instrument compulsorily registerable under the Indian Registration Act and liable to stamp duty under the Indian Stamp Act. The Division Bench held that they were leases in respect of Santosh Jaiswals case (L. P. A. No. 21/94), for a period of nine months and in Surendra Shuklas case (L. P. A. No. 22/94) for more than one year. In the counter-affidavit, filed in this Court, it was stated that lease was for more than two years.

( 3 ) SHRI Pramod Swarup, learned counsel for the appellants, contended that it is only a licence and that, therefore, it is neither an instrument compulsorily registerable under Section 17 of Registration Act nor liable to stamp duty under the Indian Stamp Act. We do not