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

1956 Supreme(Mad) 108

P.V.RAJAMANNAR
Subramaniam Chettiar – Appellant
Versus
Revenue Divisional Officer, Devakottah, Ramanathapuram – Respondent


Advocates:
A. Sundaram Ayyar, for Petitioner in W.P. No. 921 of 1955.
The Advocate-General and the Special Government Pleader (V.V. Raghavan), on behalf of the 1st Respondent.
The Advocate-General and the Special Government-Pleader on behalf of the appellant in W.A. No. 48 of 1955 and K. Bashyam and T. R. Srinivasan, for the Respondent in W.A. No. 48 of 1955.
K. Krishnaswamy Ayyangar and N. C. Ragavachari, for the Appellants in W.A. No. 76 of 1955 and K. Bashyam and T. R. Srinivasan, for the 1st Respondent.
The Advocate-General and the Special Government Pleader (V. V. Raghavan) on behalf of the 2nd Respondent in W.A. No. 76 of 1955.

Panchapakesa Aiyar, J. - These three are connected matters. W.P. No. 921 of 1955 is against the order of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Devakottai confirmed by the Collector of Ramnad at Madurai, with certain modifications, levying stamp duty and penalty on two bonds from Subramanian Chettiar, the Petitioner and the executant of those two bonds.

The facts were briefly these: The two documents were produced before the Subordinate Judge of Sivaganga by one Palaniappa Chettiar in O.S. No. 81 of 1952 on his file, filed by the said Palaniappa Chettiar, against the Petitioner, Subramaniam Chettiar, for recovering moneys due under a document renewing the debt under the two bonds, which were labelled “deposit letters”. The Court-fee Examiner put in a check-slip contending that the alleged deposit letters were really bonds and had not been duly stamped and suggesting that they should be impounded and sent to the Collector. When the matter was taken up by the Court, the plaintiff Palaniappa Chettiar agreed to have the document impounded and sent to the Collector for levying the appropriate stamp duty and penalty. The learned Subordinate Judge impounded those documents under section 35 of the





























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