Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Alfred Henry Lionel Leach, C.J.
The Collector of Madras
Versus
A.R.J. Runacres and Anr.
Decided On : 15.04.1943
Stamp Act - Proper Duty on Lease Agreement - The court held that the lease agreement should be stamped under Article 30(c) of the Stamp Act, as it involved an advance of one month's rent to be held as security for future payment of rent.
Fact of the Case:
The Collector of Madras applied for a declaration under Section 61 of the Stamp Act regarding the proper duty to be collected on three letters constituting a lease of a house in Halls Road, Egmore. The documents were unstamped and impounded by the court.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the lease agreement should be stamped under Article 30(c) of the Stamp Act, as it involved an advance of one month's rent to be held as security for future payment of rent. The court made a declaration accordingly.
Issues: Proper duty on lease agreement under the Stamp Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The lease agreement must be stamped under Article 30(c) of the Stamp Act, as it involved an advance of one month's rent to be held as security for future payment of rent.
Final Decision: The court declared that the lease agreement must be stamped under Article 30(c) of the Stamp Act.
Alfred Henry Lionel Leach, C.J.
1. This is an application by the Collector of Madras for a declaration under Section 61 of the Stamp Act with regard to the proper duty to be collected on certain documents filed as exhibits in a case which is being tried by the City Civil Court. The document consists of three letters which when read together constitute a lease of a house in Halls Road; Egmore. The tenant agreed to pay a monthly rent of Rs. 250 in advance and to deposit with the landlord a months rent. No definite term is mentioned in these letters but the tenancy is determinable on three months notice. When produced in Court the documents were unstamped and therefore were impounded. The Court held that they were stampable under Article 4-C of Schedule I-A of the Act, that is, as an agreement" not otherwise provided for." The Collector contends that the documents should be stamped under Article 30(a)(viii) or Article 30(c). Article 30(a)(viii) provides that where a lease does not purport to be for any definite term the duty chargeable shall be the same as for a conveyance for a consideration equal to three times the amount or value of the average annual rent which would be paid or delivered for the first ten years if the lease continued so long. Article 30(c) deals with a case where the lease is granted for a fine or premium or for money advanced, in addition to the rent reserved. Here the duty is the same as for a conveyance for a consideration equal to the amount or value of the fine or premium or advance, in addition to the duty which would have been payable on the lease, if no fine or premium or advance had been paid or delivered. In these letters there is a provision for an advance of one months rent, which is to be held as security for future payment of rent. In these circumstances we consider that the lease must be stamped under Article 30(c) and make a declaration accordingly.
2. A copy of this order will be sent to the Collector.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
