This revision has been filed under sec, 56(i) of the Indian Stamp Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against an order of the Collector Bhilwara dated 24.6.57 imposing a penalty of Rs. 24000/- besides a deficit stamp duty of Rs. 2399/-under sec. 40 (b) of the Act.

2. The case was heard on 9.8.1957 and it appeared necessary to issue notice to the Registrar of Companies Rajasthan as well. Shri Jit Ram Sharma has appeared on behalf of the Register. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the record as well. Two documents were executed in favour of the Bank of Rajasthan Ltd. Bhilwara creating a pledge and hypothecation for Rs. 20 lacs each Both these documents were forwarded to the Register of Companies who holding them to have been insufficiently stamped impounded the same under sec. 33 of the Act and forwarded the originals to the Collector Bhilwara of necessary action under sec. 38 (2) of the Act. As regards the hypothecation deed the learned Collector came to the conclusion that the document was exempt from duty under Art. 40(b) of the Act read with item 47 Group J, of the Separate Revenue Department notification dated 15.2.1955 published in the Rajasthan Rajpatra dated April 23, 1955, regarding reductions and remissions. He, therefore, held this hypothecation deed to be chargeable with no duty. As regards the pledge-deed he held that it was chargeable under art. 62 of the Schedule II of the Rajasthan Stamp Law Adaptation Act 1952 and as such should have been executed on a stamp paper of Rs. 2400/-. He therefore, ordered that the dificiency of Rs. 2399/—together with 10 times penalty amounting to Rs. 24000/—be realised from the applicants. This order has been Challenged before us in this revision.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the applicants has argued that the learned Collector has over-looked the important provision of law on the subject and that a deed of pledge is exempt from stamp duty. This contention has not been controverted by the opposite-party but has been frankly conceded by them. The Rajasthan Stamp Law Adaptation Act, 1952 made the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 applicable to the whole of Rajasthan with certain modifications. Schedule I enumerated the provisions of the Act which were to be exempted to the extent stated in the schedule. The first schedule to the Act was replaced by the second schedule of the Adaptation Act, 1952. In Art. 6(2) of this schedule the proper stamp duty payable on the pawn or pledge of movable property where such pawn or pledge has been made by way of security for the repayment of money advanced or to be advanced by way of loan or an existing or future debt is shown. The first portion of this article gives the duty payable as to whether the amount exceeds one figure but does not exceed the other in ascending spiral. The second portion is applicable where the loss is repayable within three months from the date of such instrument There is an exemption given in this item relates to instruments of pawn or pledge of agricultural produce if unattested. It appears that the learned Collector while deciding the case had only this provision of law in his mind and he, therefore, concluded that as the pledge was not confined to agricultural property alone the document was not included within the exemption. The other relevant provisions do not appear to have been brought to his notice. We may refer to the Separate Revenue Department notification dated l5.2.1955 published in the Rajasthan Rajpatra dated April 23, 1955, regarding reductions and remissions. J part of this notification comprising 55 items As argued by the learned counsel for the applicant the result of adaptation was to introduce a material disparity between the Indian Law and the adapted Law of Rajasthan on the point of stamp duty payable on a deed of pledge. According to the Indian Law and deed of pledge whether it related to agricultural or non-agricultural produce was exempt from such duty, whereas adap

Click Here to Read the rest of this document