CHETLAPALLI SITHARAMA RATNA RANGANAYAKAMMA Vs. VANKAMAMIDI VENKATA SUBBA RAO

K. SUBBA RAO, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a revision against the order of the District Munsif, Repalle holding that the document filed before him was a bond within the meaning of Section 2 (5) (c) of the Indian Stamp Act. On that finding, he held that the document should be stamped as such and penalty of Rs. 330/- -should be paid thereon. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that the document is not a bond within the meaning of Section 2 (5) (c) of the Indian Stamp Act but only an agreement. The relevant part of the definition of bond under Section 2 (5) (c) reads: "any instrument so attested, whereby a person obliges himself to deliver grain or other agricultural produce to another".

( 2 ) THE necessary ingredients of this definition are (i) it shall be attested by a witness and (ii) the document in itself creates an obligation to deliver grain or other agricultural produce. As the question turns upon the terms of the document, it will be convenient to read it in entirety. "letter executed on 10-4-1953 by Venkata Subbarao in favour of Ranganayakamma. I and you have agreed that I should pay you 126 bags of pad

Click Here to Read the rest of this document