Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, defendants in a suit for specific performance of contract, challenged an order of the trial court that rejected their objection to the admissibility of a document styled as a receipt but claimed by the respondents/plaintiffs to be an agreement for sale. The petitioners argued that the document was insufficiently stamped and could not be admitted in evidence under Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, unless proper stamp duty and penalty were paid. The respondents contended that the document was a receipt and did not require further stamping. The High Court examined the nature of the document and the pleadings, noting that the respondents themselves had referred to the receipt as an agreement for sale in their plaint and affidavit. The court held that since the document was claimed to be an agreement for sale, it was not properly stamped and could not be admitted in evidence. The impugned order was set aside, and the trial court was directed to impound the document and follow the procedure under the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, including collection of proper stamp duty and penalty before admitting it in evidence. The writ petition was allowed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Evidence Law - Admissibility of Documents - Insufficiently Stamped Document - Indian Stamp Act, 1899, Section 35 - The court considered whether a document styled as a receipt but claimed by the plaintiff to be an agreement for sale could be admitted in evidence when it was insufficiently stamped. The trial court had rejected the defendants' objection to its admissibility. The High Court held that under Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, an insufficiently stamped document cannot be received in evidence unless the duty chargeable and penalty are paid. Since the document was claimed to be an agreement for sale, it required proper stamping. The impugned order was set aside, and the trial court was directed to impound the document and follow the procedure under the Stamp Act. (Paras 3-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a document styled as a receipt but claimed to be an agreement for sale, which is insufficiently stamped, can be admitted in evidence without payment of proper stamp duty under the Indian Stamp Act, 1899.
Final Decision
Writ petition allowed. Impugned order dated Not mentioned passed by the trial Court is set aside. The trial Court is directed to impound the document and follow the procedure under the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, including collection of proper stamp duty and penalty before admitting it in evidence. Rule made absolute. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Document insufficiently stamped cannot be admitted in evidence unless proper stamp duty and penalty paid
- Indian Stamp Act
- 1899
- Section 35
- Objection to admissibility of document can be raised at any stage
- Document styled as receipt but claimed to be agreement for sale requires proper stamping
Case Details
2024 LawText (BOM) (01) 239
WRIT PETITION NO. 427 OF 2023
Mr A. H. Lohiya and Ms P. Nagvekar for petitioners; Mr A. R. Kantak for respondent no.1
Shri. Rohidas Gadekar and others
Shri. Shiraj Vishram and another
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil writ petition challenging trial court order rejecting objection to admissibility of document in suit for specific performance of contract.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners sought setting aside of trial court order dated Not mentioned which rejected their objection to admitting a document styled as receipt but claimed to be agreement for sale, on ground of insufficient stamping.
Filing Reason
Petitioners/defendants objected to admissibility of a document (receipt) claimed by respondents/plaintiffs to be an agreement for sale, on ground that it was insufficiently stamped and could not be admitted under Section 35 of Indian Stamp Act, 1899.
Previous Decisions
Trial court rejected petitioners' objection to admissibility of the document.
Issues
Whether a document styled as a receipt but claimed to be an agreement for sale, which is insufficiently stamped, can be admitted in evidence without payment of proper stamp duty under the Indian Stamp Act, 1899.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that the document is insufficiently stamped and cannot be admitted in evidence unless duty chargeable under Indian Stamp Act is paid. They submitted that respondents themselves stated the receipt is an agreement for sale, and issues were framed accordingly.
Respondents argued that the document is a receipt and does not require further stamping.
Ratio Decidendi
Under Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, an insufficiently stamped document cannot be received in evidence unless the duty chargeable and penalty are paid. When a document is claimed to be an agreement for sale, it must be properly stamped. The trial court erred in rejecting the objection to admissibility.
Judgment Excerpts
He submits that as per Indian Stamp Act, a document which is not properly stamped, cannot be received in evidence unless duty chargeable under the said provision has been paid thereof.
Thus objection raised by the petitioners to admit said receipt in evidence were justified as the document is not properly stamped and, therefore, the impugned order needs interference.
In such circumstances, the impugned order passed by the trial Court is liable to be set aside and the trial Court is required to impound the document and follow the procedure under the Indian Stamp Act.
Procedural History
The petitioners/defendants filed a writ petition in the High Court of Bombay at Goa challenging an order of the trial court (Civil Judge, Senior Division, at Mapusa) dated Not mentioned, which rejected their objection to the admissibility of a document (receipt) in a suit for specific performance of contract filed by the respondents/plaintiffs. The High Court heard the matter on 25th January 2024 and allowed the petition.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Stamp Act, 1899: Section 35
