1. THIS raises a question as to the duty of the stamp Reporter with regard to his report on the filing of a Memorandum appeal in this court and consequent duty of the learned Registrar, Appellate Side, on the interpretation of the business of the judicial department, Appellate Side, High Court and Rules of Orders 41, 42 and 43 of the Code of Civil Procedure, in the light of the prevailing practice and procedure, followed by the Stamp Reporter. The facts briefly are as follows: from an Original Decree and Judgment passed by Sri H. N. Sen, Judge, 8th Bench, City Civil Court, Calcutta, the memorandum, giving rise to the above appeal, was filed in this court on November 19, 1962. On the back of the Memorandum after noting in rubber stamp the date of its presentation by the Stamp Reporter, the further rubber stamps to the following effect are put in "Stamp Sufficient (as per valuation) In time in form the 2nd Judge's copy of the papers not filed Stamp Reporter."

2. THE Stamp Reporter in the instant case not only reported on June 4, 1963 as "stamp sufficient" on the back of the Memorandum but tic marks was also given against items "in time" and "in form", signifying thereby that