Karnataka High Court
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD - Appellant
Versus
R.ANANTHALAKSHMI - Respondent
Decided On : 01-17-01
M.F.A. : 3477 of 2000
Stamp Duty - Notarial Acts - Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957, Article 36 - The court discussed the provisions of Article 36 of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957, which requires notarial acts to be affixed with special adhesive stamps bearing the word 'notarial'. The court held that any act of administration of an oath in respect of an affidavit or making a certificate confirming that the affidavit was sworn to by the deponent before a Notary is a Notarial Act falling under Article 36, attracting Notarial stamp duty.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant's affidavits were objected to by the Registry for not being affixed with Notarial stamps as required under Article 36 of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957.
Finding of the Court:
The court upheld the office objection and directed the appellant to rectify the attestation of the affidavit or file a fresh affidavit duly attested within one month.
Issues: The issues revolved around the requirement of Notarial stamp duty for affidavits attested by Notaries and the contention of discrimination between affidavits attested by Notary Publics and Oath commissioners.
Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted the provisions of Article 36 of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957 and held that any act of administration of an oath in respect of an affidavit or making a certificate confirming that the affidavit was sworn to by the deponent before a Notary is a Notarial Act falling under Article 36, attracting Notarial stamp duty.
Final Decision: The office objection was upheld, and the appellant was directed to rectify the attestation of the affidavit or file a fresh affidavit duly attested within one month.
( 1 ) AS. I and II (for condonation of delay and for stay) are supported by affidavits sworn to before a Notary Public. The Registry has raised an objection that the affidavits are defective "as they have not been affixed with Notarial stamps as required under Article 36 of the schedule to the Karnataka Stamps Act, 1957 ('act' for short)
( 2 ) THE Office objections was answered by stating that affidavits to be filed in Courts were exempt from stamp duty; and therefore there was no need to affix any Notarial stamps to such affidavits. As the Registry is not satisfied the matter is placed before us for orders.
( 3 ) RELEVANT portions of Articles 4 and 36 of the Schedule to karnataka Stamp Act, 1957 ('stamp Act' for short) read as follows: article Description of instrument proper Stamp Duty 4 Affidavit, including an affirmation or declaration in the case of persons by law allowed to affirm or declare instead of Swearing. Exemptions: Affidavit or declaration in writing, when made, (a) xxx xxx xxx (b) for the immediate purpose of being filed or used in any Court or before the office of any Court; or Twenty, Rupees Article description of instrument Proper Stamp Duty (c) xxx XXX XXX 36 notarial Act, that is to say any instrument, endorsement note, attestation, certificate, or entry, not being a protest (No. 42) made or signed by a Notary Public in the execution of duties of his office, or by any other person lawfully acting as a Notary Public. Ten Rupees the Stamp duty in respect of notarial Acts is paid by affixing special adhesive stamps bearing the word 'notarial' under Section 11 (c) of the Stamp Act read with Rule 14 (a) of the Karnataka Stamp rules, 1958.
( 4 ) IF any notarial act is made or executed by a Notary with reference to an affidavit (or other instrument) then Stamp duty is attracted under Article 36 in respect of such notarial Act. The stamp duty for a notarial act under Article 36 is independent and separate from the stamp duty payable in respect of such affidavit (or other instrument ). For example if a partnership deed is executed, the stamp duty on the deed of partnership will have to be paid under Article 40. If such partnership deed executed on appropriate stamp paper is attested by a Notary, then stamp duty for the notarial Act as provided under Article 36 will have to be affixed. Therefore, the exemption granted in regard to payment of stamp duty prescribed under Article 4, in regard affidavits to be filed in Court will not apply to stamp duty prescribed for any notarial act with reference to the instrument, in the absence of a corresponding exemption under the article 36. Therefore, the contention that affidavits to be filed in Court are not required to be affixed with Notarial Stamp duty in view of the exemption under Article 4, is not tenable.
( 5 ) THE learned Counsel for the appellant next contended that all notarial acts are not liable to notarial stamp duty under Article 36 and that only the enumerated notarial acts i. e. , any instrument, endorsement note, attestation, certificate or entry (not being a protest) made or signed by a Notary Public in the execution of the duties of his office, will be liable to stamp duty as a notarial act. It is contended that when a person swears to an affidavit before a Notary, what is done by the notary is to administer oath in respect of an affidavit and such act is not an attestation or certification of an affidavit and therefore Article 36 is not attracted. The Court's attention is invited to Clauses (a) and (e) of Sub-Section (1) of Section 8 of the Notaries act which enumerates the functions of notaries. Clause (a) refers to verification, authentication, certification or attestation of execution of any instrument. Clause (e) deals with administering oath to, or taking affidavit from, any person. It is contended that Notaries act differentiates between 'attestation' under Clause (a) and 'administering oath' under Clause (e) and therefore 'attestatio
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.