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

1966 Supreme(Raj) 222

JAGAT NARAYAN
Somdatta – Appellant
Versus
Abdul Rashid – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.L. Mehta, for Petitioner

JAGAT NARAYAN, J.—This is a revision-application by the plaintiff against an order of the Munsiff, Gangapur holding that the suit pro-note is not properly stamped in as much as it bears an adhesive stamp of 10 nP. instead of an impressed stamp.

2. Under Art. 49 of Sehedule 1 to the Stamp Act a pro-note upto Rs. 250/-in value payable on demand is to be stamped with a stamp of 10 nP. When the value exceeds Rs. 250/- but does not exceed Rs. 1000/- it is to be stamped with a stamp of 15 nP. If the value exceeds Rs. 1000/- it is to be stamped with a stamp of 25 nP. Under sec. 11(a) of the Stamp Act instruments chargeable with duty not exceeding 10 nP. (except parts of bills of exchange payable otherwise than on demand and drawn in sets) may be stamped with adhesive stamps. The promissory note in suit is of the value of Rs. 150/-. It is chargeable with stamp duty of 10 nP. Under sec. 11 (a) of the Stamp Act it can be stamped with adhesive stamps.

3. Rule 6 of the Rajasthan Stamp Rules runs as follows—

6. Promissory note and bill of exchange— A promissory note or a bill of exchange shall, except as provided by sec. 11 or by rules 14 and 19, be written on paper on which a stamp of the proper




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