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

1915 Supreme(Mad) 427

S.AIYAR, PHILLIPS
Raman Chetty – Appellant
Versus
Nagappa Chetty – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. We think that Section 44 of the Stamp Act was intended to give a right to an innocent party, who himself was not guilty of any default in the matter of the proper stamping of a document, to recover the duty or penalty he was obliged to pay, from the person or persons guilty of the default and that it was not intended to enable one of several persons, who were under a common duty to pay the proper stamp in proportionate shares, to claim recovery of the proportionate amount of the duty or penalty the whole of which he was afterwards obliged to pay owing to the common default. In this view, it is unnecessary to consider the question of limitation, and we dismiss the Letters Patent Appeal with costs.

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