SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2005 Supreme(AP) 21

A.GOPAL REDDY
State Bank of Hyderabad – Appellant
Versus
Government Of A. P. – Respondent


A. GOPAL REDDY, J.

( 1 ) THIS writ petition raises a point of some significance in relation to proper construction and interaction of Section 56 of indian Stamp Act, 1899 (for short the Act ) which reads thus:control of and statement of case to, Chief controlling Revenue Authority: (1) The powers exercisable by a Collector under Chapter IV and Chapter V and under clause (a) of the first proviso to Section 26 shall in all cases be subject to the control of the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority. (2) If any Collector, acting under Section 31 section 40 or Section 41- feels doubt as to the amount of duty with which any instrument is chargeable, he may draw up a statement of the case, and refer it, with his own opinion thereon, for the decision of the chief Controlling Revenue Authority. (3) Such authority shall consider the case and a copy of its decision to the Collector, who shall proceed to assess and charge the duty (if any) in conformity with such decision. Since the revision was filed against the order passed by the District Registrar under Sections 31 and 32 of the Act, it is necessary to resolve the controversy on true interpretation of above sections, which provides:section



















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top