Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : ALLADI KUPPUSWAMI
Bommaguni Rangaiah - Appellant
Versus
Bommaguni Rangaswamy - Respondent
Decided On : 01-30-70
STAMP ACT - ADMISSIBILITY OF DOCUMENT - INSTRUMENT COMPRISING OR RELATING TO SEVERAL DISTINCT MATTERS - WILL AND SETTLEMENT IN ONE DOCUMENT - ADMISSIBILITY OF WILL PORTION WITHOUT STAMP.
Fact of the Case:
In a partition suit, the petitioner relied on a document styled as a will, which was held to operate as a will in so far as the properties bequeathed to him were concerned and as a settlement in favor of the fourth defendant in respect of the other half share. The trial court held that the document could not be admitted in evidence as it was not stamped. The petitioner challenged this order in revision.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the document could be relied upon as a will by the petitioner to prove the bequest in his favor. It reasoned that the document, though written on one piece of paper, comprised two distinct instruments - a settlement in favor of the fourth defendant and a will in favor of the petitioner. Since a will is not required to be stamped under the Stamp Act, the petitioner could rely on the provisions contained in the bequest in his favor, even though the document did not bear any stamp.
Issues: Whether a document comprising or relating to several distinct matters, one of which is not chargeable with stamp duty, can be admitted in evidence for the purpose of proving the matter not chargeable with stamp duty, even if the document as a whole is not stamped.
Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted section 5 of the Stamp Act, which provides that an instrument comprising or relating to several distinct matters shall be chargeable with the aggregate amount of the duties with which separate instruments each comprising or relating to one of such matters would be chargeable. The court held that section 5 applies only to cases where each of the separate instruments relating to one of such matters would be chargeable under the Act. In the present case, since the will portion of the document did not require any stamp, section 5 did not apply, and the petitioner could rely on the will portion without paying stamp duty.
Final Decision: The revision petition was allowed, and the document was directed to be admitted in evidence as a will to the extent of the bequest in favor of the petitioner.
( 2 ) SUBSEQUENTLY the petitioner (Second defendant) filed a petition I. A. No. 26 of 1968 under Order 13 rule 4 read with section 151 Civil Procedure Code to admit the document in evidence to the extent of the bequest in his favour. His contention was that according to the judgment of the lower Court as affirmed by the High court the document operated only as a will in so far as the properties given to him under this document were concerned. Therefore, he could rely upon that document to the extent that it related to the properties bequeathed in his favour even though it was not stamped. This application was opposed by the respondent herein (Plaintiff) on the ground that the document must be taken as a whole and as it was not stamped it could not be relied upon for any purpose, even as a will bequeathing certain properties in favour of the petitioner herein. The Court below accepted the contention of the respondent and held that the instrument cannot be separated into two parts and without payment of penalty the document is not admissible in evidence. It therefore, directed the petitioner herein to pay penalty immediately if he desired to rely upon the document.
( 3 ) THE petitioner herein has filed this revision petition questioning the correctness of the said order. As stated earlier this Court has in C. R. P. No. 1196 of 1966 taken the view that the document operates as a will in so far as the bequest of a half share to the petitioner is concerned and operates as a settlement in favour of the fourth defendant in so far as the other half share is concerned, I have therefore, to proceed on the footing and consider whether in such circumstances the party who is claiming the properties which have been bequeathed to him under the said document can rely upon the document as a will and contend that the document is admissible even though it is not stamped for the purpose of proving his claim to the properties bequeathed to him or whether he should pay the stamp and penalty thereon before he is permitted to rely upon that document.
( 4 ) THE result of the decision in (I. A. No. 26 of 1968) as confirmed by this Court is that in effect there are two instruments though written on one piece of paper, namely a settlement in favour of the fourth defendant and a will in favour of the petitioner. As a will is not one of the instruments which has to be stamped under the provisions of the Stamp Act, it follows that the petitioner can only rely upon the provisions contained in the bequest in his favour, even though the document does not bear any stamp. The lear
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.