SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1956 Supreme(Raj) 66

WANCHOO, RANAWAT, SHARMA
Jaidayal Shanti Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Gajadhar – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
G.N. Sharma, for Petitioners; S.B.L. Saxena, for Opposite Party; C.B. Bhargava, Dy. Govt. Advocate

Wanchoo, C. J.—These are two connected civil references by the Board of Revenue under sec. 57 of the Stamp act as adapted to Rajasthan by the Rajasthan Stamp Law (Adaptation) Act (No. VII of 1952) (hereinafter to be referred to as the Rajasthan Act). As the point raised in the two references is exactly the same, we propose to decided it by one judgment.

2. We set out briefly the facts which have led to these references. Two suits were pending before the Civil Judge, Gangapur on two Hundis. In both cases the Hundis are said to bear sufficient stamps but of improper description. Therefore, the plaintiffs of the two suits applied to the Collector for a certificate under sec. 37 of the Stamp Act. The Collector refused to give the certificate holding that he could not issue a certificate under that section till rules were framed by the State Government as provided therein. He was of the view that the Jaipur Stamp Rules which were in force could not be said to have continued after the coming into force of the Rajasthan Act. Thereupon, the two plaintiffs brought the matter to the notice of the Board of Revenue under sec. 56(1) of the Stamp Act and the Board has made these references under




















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top