The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the definition of a bond under Section 2(5) of the Indian Stamp Act and the fulfillment of its conditions to classify a document as a bond.

JUDGMENT :

G.K. Misra, C.J. - The Plaintiff?s case was that Defendant who had 8 annas interest in Truck No. O.R.U. 983 had decided to purchase the other 8 annas interest from his share holder so as to become full owner in respect of the vehicle. The Defendant approached the Plaintiff through her husband, who was known to him, for an amount of Rs. 7,000/- to purchase the 8 annas interest in the Truck from his share holder. On 13-11-1968 the Defendant executed a document in favour of the Plaintiff. This document was produced by the Plaintiff. When she wanted that it should be marked as an exhibit, objection was taken that it was a bond and it is to be impounded and unless stamp duties are paid the document cannot be marked as an exhibit. The learned Subordinate Judge accepted this objection and held that the-document was a bond and he did not mark it as an exhibit. It is against this order that the Civil Revision has been filed.

2. The substance of the recitals in the bond is that the executant borrowed Rs. 7,000/- to purchase the 8 annas interest in the Truck. Two modes of repayment were prescribed in the document. The first was that repayment would be made by transferring 6 annas interest in the Truck or it would be made in cash with damages.

The Plaintiff contended that the document was a receipt while the Defendant?s case was that it was a bond. The document has been affixed with two stamps of 10 naya paise each.

3. " Bond" has been defined in Section 2(5) of the Indian Stamp Act. The definition runs thus:

Section "2(5). Bond.-" Bond" includes /p>

(a) any instrument whereby a person obliges himself to pay money to another on condition that the obligation shall be valid if a specified act is performed, or is not performed, as the case may be;

(b) any instrument attested by a witness and not payable to order or bearer, whereby a person obliges himself to pay money to another; and

(c) any instrument so attested, whereby a person obliges himself to deliver grain or other agricultural produce to another.

4. It would appear from the aforesaid definition that there are three Clauses - (a), (b) and (c). Mr. Harichandan contended that conditions in all the three clauses are to be fulfilled before a document is said to be a bond. The contention is not borne out by the language of the definition. All the three clauses must be disjunctively taken and if any document comes within the mischief of anyone of the clauses it would be a bond.

5. Clause (a) says that if a person takes an obligation on himself to pay money to another, on condition that the obligation shall be valid if a specified act is performed, or is not performed; then the instalment is a bond. In this case the Defendant incurred a loan under the bond from the Plaintiff. He obliged himself to pay that money either by transferring his 6 annas interest or the entire money with damage. Thus, an obligation was created in favour of the Plaintiff against the Defendant. The obligation so incurred would be valid until the loan was discharged or the six annas interest in the Truck was transferred in favour of the Plaintiff. The document is, therefore, clearly a bond.

6. The learned Advocate appearing in the case were given time to find out a single decision where in it has been said that all the three clauses would be taken together. Mr. Harichandan and Mr. Jena frankly stated that not a single decision of that/nature is available. This is so, for good reasons, as on the plain language of the definition the three clauses must be taken disjunctively. Each one is an independent clause and it is not interlined with any other.

7. The Civil Revision has no merit which is accordingly dismissed, but in the circumstances there will be no order as to costs.

8. If the Plaintiff so wants the Subordinate Judge would impound the impugned document and give an opportunity to the Plaintiff to pay the stamp duty whereupon the Plaintiff would be in a position to mark this document as an exhibit. The records of th