[IN REVISION.]        

1922 Present : Bertram C.J.

 WIJESURIYA. v. SAMARASINGHE.

 P. C. Colombo, 42,011.

Stamp duty-Lease-Mortgage affecting more lands than one embodied in leases-Ordinance No. 10 of 1919, Part I, Schedule B.

Mortgages affecting more lands than one embodied in leases are chargeable with the full duty chargeable on mortgages, including
the duty leviable in respect of additional lands, and they are not entitled to the benefit of the third proviso to paragraph 31A.

THE facts appear from the judgment.

J. S. Jayawardene.-Paragraph 31A of Part I of Schedule B of Ordinance No. 10 of 1919 provides that a lease should be stamped with the same stamp duty as on a mortgage bond. Now the proviso to that paragraph provides that no duty shall be paid in respect of any additional lands. This is a general provision, and must be taken to apply to all duties mentioned in this paragraph, so that it applies to a mortgage bond embodied in a lease as well as to the lease itself. There does not seem to be any ambiguity in the language of this proviso, but even if it is held to be ambiguous, it must be interpreted in favour of the subject.

M. W. H. de Silva,-Paragraph 31A deals only with the duty on leases, and in case of leases there is no extra duty for additional lands ; but when a lease embodies a mortgage of land also the document has to be stamped as two separate documents, namely, a lease and a mortgage. The duty on the mortgage is provided for by paragraph 15; which provides that there shall be an extra stamp duty on each additional land. It is conceded that if the interpretation suggested by the appellant is adopted, a lease and a mortgage executed separately would be liable to more stamp duty than if they were embodied in the same document. But the second proviso to paragraph 31A shows that it should be the same.

This Ordinance was enacted to enable the registration duty to be collected at the time of the execution of the document itself and to prevent the non registration of deeds. Under the old law there was an extra duty for the registration of every additional land in the case of transfers and mortgages of land. but not in the case of leases The paragraph in question. gave effect to this

distinction, and the proviso must be taken as referring only to leases. The proviso to this paragraph must be read independently, and the duty referred to in the third proviso is the duty on leases only, and not the duties referred to in the other provisos.

September 1, 1922. BERTRAM C.J.-

This point is an obscure one, but Mr. de Silva has cleared it up beyond reasonable doubt. The question for consideration was this. Paragraph 31A of Part I. of Schedule B of the Stamp Ordinance, No. 10 of 1919, like the corresponding provision of the previous Stamp Ordinance, declares that a lease shall be stamped in the same manner as a mortgage.. It then proceeds to enact three provisos. The first proviso limits the duty to what would be the duty for a lease for six years. The second proviso provides that where the lease also contains a mortgage, the mortgage shall be separately chargeable. The third proviso declares that no duty is leviable in respect of any additional lands. It is agreed that in this third proviso the word "is" should be construed as "shall be," and it is further agreed that the third proviso has reference to a new enactment introduced for the first time ,into our stamp legislation by Ordinance No. 10 of 1919. The new enactment referred to is to be found in the proviso to paragraph 15, which lays down a special scale of duties in the case of mortgages comprising more lands than one. Now the question to be determined is whether these three provisos are three independent provisos, or whether they are interdependent. If they are interdependent, it is argued that the exemption from duty contained in the third proviso affects 'all references