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

1960 Supreme(MP) 204

V.R.NEWASKAR
Sobhagmal Kesharimal Mahajan – Appellant
Versus
Ramnivas Murlidhar Mahajan – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff: R.G. Waghmare
For Respondents/Defendant: Dharkar

ORDER

V.R. Newaskar, J.

This revision petition is directed against an order holding that the document sued upon is liable to stamp duty under Article 15 of the Stamp Act as a bond and requiring the plaintiff to pay the duty and penalty amounting to Rs. 343-12-0.

The document in question ran thus:-

Date of maturity:- Masgar Sudi 1 Samvat 2012. Salutation to Bhai Sobhagmalji Kesrimalji, I have received Rs. 5,000 (in words rupees five thousands) taken by me for one month on Katik Sudi 1 Samvat 2012. Written on Miti Katik Sudi 1 Samvat 2012.

(One anna stamp)

Ramniwas Murlidhar

Sd. Ratanlal

Having regard to the terms of this document which is not attested it has to be seen whether the Court below was justified in construing it to be a bond. The term bond is defined under section 2(5) of the Indian Stamp Act:-

'Bond' includes:-

(a) Any instrument whereby a person obliges himself to pay money to another, on condition that the obligation shall be void 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






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