Back
ALKA SARIN
Preetjot Kaur – Appellant
Versus
Hardeep Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Alka Sarin, J.
The present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 01.09.2018 (Annexure P-5) passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ludhiana whereby the application filed by defendants No.1 and 2-petitioners for impounding the original agreement to sell dated 30.04.2008 as per Sections 33 and 35 of the Indian STAMP ACT , 1899 was dismissed.
2. Learned counsel for defendants No.1 and 2-petitioners would contend that no doubt that only a photocopy of the document was available on the file, however, relying upon the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Kasireddy Satyanarayana V/s State of Andhra Pradesh [2021 (5) ALT 581] it is contended that if the original document, which was filed in the Court and was deficiently stamped, is lost or misplaced while in the custody of the Court, it can be reconstructed by the Court by exercising its inherent powers and the document assumes the character of an original document including for the purpose of the STAMP ACT .
3. Per contra, learned counsel for plaintiff-respondent No.1 has relied upon a judgment of this Court in the case of Sande
Once a document is admitted as evidence, deficiencies in stamp duty cannot be questioned, and a photocopy cannot be impounded if the original is attached in another case.
Only original documents can be validated under the Indian Stamp Act; photocopies cannot be validated or impounded, irrespective of secondary evidence provisions.
Only original documents can be validated under the Indian Stamp Act; photocopies are inadmissible for legal purposes, reinforcing established principles regarding document admissibility.
Point of law : Even a copy of the original document whether certified or not and whether a fascimile image or otherwise of the original is chargeable with duty of an amount which is indicated in Sche....
A photocopy of a document is inadmissible as secondary evidence if the original document is not duly stamped, per the Indian Stamp Act.
There is no error in assumption of jurisdiction under Section 33(5) read with Section 40 of the Act. The petitioner was given an opportunity to reply to the show cause notice. That he did. However, i....
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
