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

A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO
A. P. Laly – Appellant
Versus
Gurram Rama Rao – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Sri Venkateswarlu Chakkilam, Advocate
For the Respondent:Sri M.R.S. Srinivas, Advocate

Judgement Key Points

Paragraph 30 emphasizes that in the absence of any evidence indicating that the trial court had made a formal decision regarding the admissibility of a document, the application filed by the defendant to de-exhibit the document remains valid and maintainable. It underscores that the plaintiff has the opportunity to pay the required stamp duty and penalty, and then request the court to admit the document in evidence. Ultimately, the court has the authority to decide whether to admit and mark the document, regardless of whether it was properly stamped initially or not.


ORDER

A. Ramalingeswara Rao, J.—Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent.

2. The plaintiff is the petitioner herein. She filed O.S.No.6 of 2014 on the file of VI Additional District Judge, Markapur for recovery of an amount of Rs. 18,92,000/- from the defendant. The suit was filed on the basis of a hand letter executed on 14.02.2011. The evidence of the parties was completed. During the course of evidence of PW.1, the said hand letter was marked as Ex.A1 and was treated as an agreement under Article 6(A) of Schedule I(A) of the Indian Stamp Act (for short ‘the Act’). PW.1 was cross-examined. When the case was posted for arguments on defendant’s side, the defendant filed I.A.No.490 of 2016 stating that the said document is not an agreement but it is a bond within the meaning of Section 2(5)(b) of the Act as laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in B. Bhavannarayana v. Kommuru Vullakki Cloth Merchant Firm 1996(1) ALT 917 (FB), and it is liable to be stamped under Article 13 of Schedule I(A) of the Act and not under Article 6(A) (iv) of Schedule I(A) of the Act. It was stated that it happened by inadvertence. Though the said document was marked



































































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