Safir v. Sajid
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court of Kerala held that an agreement acknowledging a pre-existing liability and undertaking to repay it within a timeframe is an agreement, not a bond under the Kerala Stamp Act, 1959. The court set aside the impugned order directing payment of stamp duty and penalty.
What did the court decide?
The original petition is allowed; the order dated 14.10.2019 in O.S.No.126 of 2017 is set aside.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM
WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 21ST ASWINA, 1943
OP(C) NO. 2748 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 14.10.2019 IN OS NO.126/2017 OF I ADDITIONAL SUB COURT, KOZHIKODE
PETITIONER:
SAFIR,AGED 38 YEARS,S/O ABDUL KADAR, KURUPPARUKANDI HOUSE, EKAROOR P.O, UNNIKULAM VILLAGE, THAMARASSERY TALUK, KOZHIKKODE DISTRICT.
BY ADVS. N.M.MADHU C.S.RAJANI
RESPONDENT:
SAJID, AGED 43 YEARS,S/O KUTTYHASSAN, PUTHANPURAYIL HOUSE, P.O. AVILORA, KIZHAKOTH VILLAGE, THAMARASSERY TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT- 673 572 BY ADVS. SRI.V.V.SURENDRAN SRI.P.A.HARISH
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a document acknowledging a pre-existing debt and undertaking to repay it within a time frame constitutes a bond under the Kerala Stamp Act, 1959 or merely an agreement.
Whether the trial court correctly impounded the document treating it as a bond and directed payment of stamp duty and penalty.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
SAFIR
- respondent
SAJID
Coram
VIJU ABRAHAM
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court