S. ANANDA REDDY, J.

( 1 ) THIS referred case is at the instance of the petitioner-Company, referred by the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority under S. 57 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (herein after referred to as the Act ). The following question is referred for the opinion of this Court :"whether the document under consideration styled as letter of subrogation and special Power of Attorney is a general power of attorney attracting a stamp duty of Rs. 20. 00 or whether it is in addition an assignment of the benefit of a contract to be treated as conveyance under Art. 20 of Schedule I-A of Indian Stamp Act. "

( 2 ) THE facts of the case are as follows :the petitioner-Company approached the District Registrar, Visakhapatnam with a draft deed purporting to be a letter of subrogation and special power of attorney for opinion under S. 31 of the Act. The District Registrar opined that the document was an assignment of the benefit of a contract to be treated as conveyance under Art. 20 of Schedule I-A of the Act and also the power of attorney under Art. 42 (c) of Schedule I-A, chargeable with higher duties. However, the District Registrar referred the matter under S. 56 (2) of the Act, to the Commissioner of Survey, Settlements and Land Records. The Inspector General, Registration and Stamps, whose remarks were called for, confirmed the opinion of the District Registrar. On receipt of the remarks of the Inspector General, Registration and Stamps, a communication was sent from the office of the Commissioner of Survey, Settlement and Land Records with the remarks of the Inspector General to the District Registrar treating it as if it was the decision of the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority. The District Registrar accordingly adjudicated the document. Aggrieved by the said opinion of the District Registrar, Visakhapatnam, the petitioner-Company filed a petition before the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority for reference. The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority thereafter referred the matter to this Court expressing his opinion. According to the opinion of the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, the document is only power of attorney authorising the Insurance Company to proceed against the transporter for recovery of the loss and it is chargeable at the rate of Rs. 20. 00 under Art. 42 (c) of the Schedule I-A. The petitioner-Company is the manufacturer, which dispatches its goods to different destinations. In order to safeguard its interest from any loss in the transit, the goods were insured with the National Insurance Company Limited. Whenever there is loss/damage to the petitioner in respect of the goods insured, the loss will be compensated by the Insurance Company and the Insurance Company will proceed against the transporting agency or transporter to make good the loss. In that connection for proper, effective and convenient prosecution of the proceedings, the document in question is proposed to be executed in favour of the Insurance Company.

( 3 ) THE document in question is styled as "a letter of Subrogation and Special Power of Attorney" executed by the petitioner-Company in favour of the National Insurance Company Ltd. , subrogating to the rights of the petitioner-Company arising from the loss/damage to the goods, in consideration of paying the amount assured under the insurance policy to the petitioner-Company.

( 4 ) THE relevant terms as appearing in the document are as under :"we hereby assign, transfer and abandon all our actionable rights, title and interest in and to the said goods and proceeds thereof. . . . . . . . . ""we hereby guarantee that we are the persons entitled to enforce the terms of the contract of transportation. . . . . . . . . . . . . ""we hereby subrogate to you the rights and powers that we have in consequence or arising from loss/damage to the under mentioned goods. . . . . . . . . . . ""we also hereby authorise you to use our name in any action or proceeding that you may bring either in your ow

Click Here to Read the rest of this document