Cornelis Appuhamy V. Kiri Banda Et Al.,

1938 Present: Poyser S. P. J. and Wijeyewardene J.

CORNELIS APPUHAMY v. KIRI BANDA et al.
 
162-D. C. Colombo, 7,569.

Stamp duty-Acknowledgment of debt-Document not given as evidence of debt-Liability to duty-Stamps Ordinance, No. 22 of 1909, Schedule B., Part I., item I., s. 36 (b).

In an action on a mortgage bond the plaintiff, in order to meet a plea of prescription put forward by the defendant, sought to put in evidence a document signed by the defendant in which he acknowledged that the principal sum and interest from a certain date was due. Objection was taken to the document on the ground that it should have been stamped under item I., Part I., Schedule B of the Stamp Ordinance.

Held, that the document did not fall for duty under item I., Part I. of Schedule B, as it was not given with the dominant intent of supplying evidence of a debt and that the document should have been admitted in evidence upon payment of a penalty, if any, under section 36 of the Stamp Ordinance.

APPEAL from an order of the District Judge of Colombo.

J. E. M. Obeyesekere (with him S. W. Jayasuriya), for plaintiff, appellant.

J. R.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document