M Rama Krishna Reddy v. Kothakota Kamala , Kamalamma
Case brief
What is this about?
This revision under Article 227 of the Constitution urged setting aside a trial order that misclassified a promissory note as a bond under Section 2(5) of the Indian Stamp Act. Distinguishing a Full Bench precedent, the High Court held the document was a security bond leviable under Article 48 of Schedule 1-A.
What did the court decide?
Revision disposed of directing petitioner to pay stamp duty and penalty in terms of Article 48 of Schedule 1-A of Indian Stamp Act.
What the court decided
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2104 of 2015
ORDER :
This revision is filed, under Article 227 of Constitution of India, by the petitioner-plaintiff, challenging the order, dated 15.04.2015, passed by the IV-Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, in O.S.No.855 of 2014 directing the office to collect the stamp duty and penalty as levied under Article 13 of Schedule 1-A of Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (for short, ‘the Act’) from the petitioner.
- Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the trial Court recorded the finding that the nature of the document i.e., promissory is changed to that of a bond as defined under Section 2(5) of the Act chargeable under Article 13 of the Act and the office note in charging the instrument under Article 48 of Schedule 1-A of the Act is negatived and not approved. Aggrieved by the order of the trial Court, the present revision is filed.
- The main ground raised before this Court is that the order passed by the trial Court is contrary to the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Bolisetti Bhavannarayana @ Venkata Bhavannarayana v.
Kommuru Vullakki Cloth Merchant Firm, Tenali, rep. by partner Kommuru Vullakki and others1 . Therefore, the order cannot be sustained and set aside the same by exercising power under Article 227 of Constitution of India.
1 1996 (1) ALT 917 (FB)
2
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a promissory note can be recharacterized as a bond under Section 2(5) of the Indian Stamp Act leviable under Article 13 of Schedule 1-A.
Whether the Full Bench judgment in Bolisetti Bhavannarayana case is applicable to security bonds.
Whether the trial Court's order requiring stamp duty under Article 13 is legally sustainable.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
PETITIONER-PLAINTIFF
- respondent
STATE/DEFENDANT
Coram
M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Telangana HC
- Decided on
- · June
- Registered
- Case no.
- CRP/2104/2015
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court