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

1965 Supreme(MP) 37

P.V.DIXIT, K.L.PANDEY, N.M.GOLVALKER
KOMAL CHAND – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
M.L.SHRIVASTAV, R.J.BHAVE, Y.S.DHARMADHIKARI

DIXIT, C. J.

( 1 ) THIS is a reference under Section 57 (1) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) by the Board of Revenue as the Chief controlling Revenue Authority pursuant to an order made by a Division Bench of this Court on 9th January 1962 in Misc. Petition No. 283 of 1961 directing the chief Controlling Revenue Authority to state the case of the petitioners for the opinion of this Court on the following questions : 1. Whether after the registration of a document the registering authority can hold an enquiry regarding the value of the property covered by the deed and call upon the executant to pay the deficit stamp duly?

( 2 ) WHETHER the stamp duty payable on the deed executed by the petitioner Komalchand is as for a partition deed or for a settlement deed? 2. The material facts are that after the registration on 31st October 1956 of a deed described as 'takseemnama' (deed of partition) executed by the petitioner komalchand, the Sub-Registrar, Jabalpur, sent the document to the Collector, jabalpur, purporting to act under paragraph 232 of the Registration Manual reporting that the deed was insufficiently stamped The Sub-Divisional Officer, jabalpur


















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