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

1967 Supreme(Mad) 172

Madras High Court
M.ANANTANARAYANAN,RAMAKRISHNAN,NATESAN
Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Madras, Board of Revenue Madras, Referring Officer - Appellant
Versus
Canara Industrial and Banking Syndicate Ltd., Madras - Respondent
Decided On : 04/17/1967

Advocates:
Addl. Govt. Pleader, for the State; M. L. Naick, R. Gopalaswami Aiyangar, K. Venkataswami, K. Alagiriswami and S. Jagadisan, for Respondents.

An unregistered instrument, which is effective to transfer rights as a conveyance or a deed of mortgage, is liable to be stamped under Art. 23 of Sch. I of the Stamp Act, even though it is not registered.

Headnote:

STAMP ACT - CHARGEABLE INSTRUMENT - EXECUTION - REGISTRATION - LIABILITY TO STAMP DUTY - INTERPRETATION OF DICTUM IN CROMPTON ENGINEERING CO., (MADRAS) LTD. V. CHIEF CONTROLLING REVENUE AUTHORITY MADRAS, 1953-1 MAD LJ 620 : (AIR 1953 MAD 764) (F. B.)

Fact of the Case:

The case involved a dispute over whether an unregistered instrument, which was effective to transfer rights as a conveyance or a deed of mortgage, was liable to be stamped under Art. 23 of Sch. I of the Stamp Act, even though it was not registered.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the instrument was liable to be stamped under Art. 23 of Sch. I of the Stamp Act, even though it was not registered. The court interpreted the dictum in Crompton Engineering Co., (Madras) Ltd. v. Chief Controlling Revenue Authority Madras, 1953-1 Mad LJ 620 : (AIR 1953 Mad 764) (F. B.) as being of restricted scope and applicable only to the facts of that case.

Issues: 1. Whether an unregistered instrument, which was effective to transfer rights as a conveyance or a deed of mortgage, was liable to be stamped under Art. 23 of Sch. I of the Stamp Act? 2. Whether the dictum in Crompton Engineering Co., (Madras) Ltd. v. Chief Controlling Revenue Authority Madras, 1953-1 Mad LJ 620 : (AIR 1953 Mad 764) (F. B.) should be interpreted as of general application or as being restricted to the facts of that case?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the instrument was liable to be stamped under Art. 23 of Sch. I of the Stamp Act, even though it was not registered, because the Stamp Act envisages a document as being liable to stamp duty at the time of its execution, and not at the time of its registration. 2. The court interpreted the dictum in Crompton Engineering Co., (Madras) Ltd. v. Chief Controlling Revenue Authority Madras, 1953-1 Mad LJ 620 : (AIR 1953 Mad 764) (F. B.) as being of restricted scope and applicable only to the facts of that case, because the document in that case was not duly executed, as it was not attested by two witnesses, as required by law.

Final Decision: The court answered the reference in the form that the document was liable for stamp duty under Art. 23 of Sch. I and that the dicta in Crompton Engineering Co., (Madras) Ltd. v. Chief Controlling Revenue Authority Madras, 1953-1 Mad LJ 620 : (AIR 1953 Mad 764) (F B) will have to be interpreted as of restricted scope and with reference to the facts of that case.

Judgement

ANANTANARAYANAN, C.J. :- These references under Section 57 of the Indian Stamp Act 1899, are closely inter-related in the substantial question involved, namely, what was precisely decided in Crompton Engineering Co., (Madras) Ltd. v. Chief Controlling Revenue Authority Madras, 1953-1 Mad LJ 620 : (AIR 1953 Mad 764) (F. B.) and how far should the dicta in that judgment be pressed with regard to an unregistered instrument, which, but for registration, is effective to transfer rights as a conveyance or a deed of mortgage? Of the three references, R. C. 13 of 1965 is the most significant, on the facts, and the arguments were really elaborated in this case. Therefore, we consider it most appropriate to deal with this reference immediately, and in detail. The question for our decision is :

"Whether the instrument in question is not liable to be stamped under Art. 23 of Sch. I of the Stamp Act, even though it is not registered, and whether instruments in general are to be stamped on execution notwithstanding that other conditions which validate the transfer of rights which the instruments purport to make are not present?"

Before dealing with the main issue, in this select reference (R. C. No. 13 of 1965), it is essential to set forth the several definitions and provisions of the Indian Stamp Act II of 1899, as amended upto date. No apology is, hence, needed for these verbatim citations, as the definitions and their juxtaposition have to be borne in mind, when considering the question really involved. Section 2(6) - Definition of 'chargeable' : 'Chargeable' means, as applied to an instrument executed or first executed after the commencement of this Act, chargeable under this Act, and, as applied to any other instrument, chargeable under the law in force in India, when such instrument was executed or, where several persons -executed the instrument at different times, first executed. Section 2 (10) - Definition of 'conveyance' : 'Conveyance' includes a conveyance on sale and every instrument by which property, whether moveable or immoveable, is transferred inter vivos and which is not otherwise specifically provided for by Sch. I (or by Sch. I-A as the case may be .........

Section 2 (12) - Definition of 'executed' and 'execution' : 'Executed' and 'execution' used with reference to instruments, mean "signed" and "signature."

Section 2 (14) - Definition of 'instrument'. 'Instrument' includes every document by which any right or liability is, or purports to be created, transferred, limited, extended, extinguished or recorded. Section 2 (17) - Definition of 'Mortgage deed' : "Mortgage deed" includes every instrument whereby for the purpose of securing money advanced, or to be advanced by way of loan, or an existing or future debt, or the performance of an engagement, one person transfers, or creates to, or in favour of, another, a right over or in respect of specified property".

Section 3. - "Subject to the provisions of this Act and the exemptions contained in Sch. I, the following instruments shall be chargeable with duty of the amount indicated in that schedule as the proper duty therefor respectively, that is to say -

(a) every instrument mentioned in that schedule which, not having been previously executed by any person, is executed in India on or after the first day of July 1899..........

Section 17. - "All instruments chargeable with duty and executed by any person in India shall be stamped before or at the time of execution".

A very brief reference is sufficient to the relevant Articles of the Stamp Act. Under Art. 23 of Sch. I, a document is liable to duty as "a conveyance as defined by Sec. 2 (10)........."

2. Section 2 (23) embodies the definition of a 'receipt', which 'includes any note, memorandum or writing (a) whereby any money, or any bill of exchange, cheque or promissory note is acknowledged to have been received". The relevant Article of Sch. I is Art. 53, which is "Receipt as defined by Sec. 2 (23) for any money or ot


















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 Back to top