Can an agreement be signed through signature rubber stamp (Legal Documents)

This query is : Resolved

Author : Mahesh

PRO CHAT CALL

Posted On 16 May 2009 at 16:21

sir,
a person is required to sign thousands of agreements. Can he sign the agreements by way of affixing a signature rubber stamp? If yes, is there any legal procedure involved in making these agreements valid?

Thanks

Mahesh

Expert : adv. rajeev ( rajoo )

PRO CHAT CALL

Posted On 16 May 2009 at 16:59

He cannot sign by way of affixing a signature rubber stamp. Rubber stamp can be used by anybody, there is chances of forzery.

Expert : Dr. V.N.Tripathi

PRO CHAT CALL

Posted On 16 May 2009 at 18:24

If a statute requires personal signature of a person, which includes a mark, the signature or the mark must be that of the man himself. There must be physical contact between that person and the signature or the mark put on the documents. AIR 1950 SC 265 [Para 22]

Expert : M. PIRAVI PERUMAL

PRO CHAT CALL

Posted On 16 May 2009 at 19:50

I agree with the views of Mr. Tripathi.

Expert : PALNITKAR V.V.

PRO CHAT CALL

Posted On 16 May 2009 at 20:19

Also see AIR 1998 SC 2904. A rubber stamp is permissible unless the law requires personal signature or mark like thumb impression to validate the agreement.

Expert : Dr. V.N.Tripathi

PRO CHAT CALL

Posted On 16 May 2009 at 22:46

AIR 1950 SC 265 was a constitution bench decision of supreme court. it was fallowed in two judge bench decision of supreme court in AIR 1998 SC 2904. however signing by ruber stamp was not in issue in either of both cases. in former decision, signature by agent on behalf of principal was held invalid by supreme court, and in later, signing on behalf of attestor of will by some other person was held invalid in view of s. 63(c)of Indian succession Act and s. 68 of Evidence Act.in this case it was held that the tetator can authorise some other person to sign on his behalf but attestor can not do so.

Expert : J K Agrawal

PRO CHAT CALL

Posted On 17 May 2009 at 14:10

Ld friends
I agree with all of you.
Just think about an example, if it is possible for any director to sigh each and every share certificate? (certainly no and a printed signature do)

An agreement does not require to be in writting unless it is required by a special provision of law.

affixing stamp instead of signing is a complete agreement and fulfills all conditions of an ORAL AGREEMENT. If your agreement is not required to be in writting by any law the stamped agreement is valid and binding all parties assuming that agreement is oral only.

The subsiquent conduct of parties proves and confirms the existence of agreement.

Expert : N.K.Assumi

PRO CHAT CALL

Posted On 17 May 2009 at 16:12

Dear Palnitkar, grateful if you kindly mentioned the name of the parties in the case cited by you.Thank you all of you.

Expert : Dr. V.N.Tripathi

PRO CHAT CALL

Posted On 17 May 2009 at 22:24

AIR 1998 SC 2904 = Nagulapati Lakshmamma v. Mupparaju subbaiyah) -Succession Act (39 of 1925), S.63(c) - WILL -Attestation - Proper mode - Attesting witness should either sign or affix his thumb impression himself - Section does not permit delegation of that function - If he does so, he does not remain attesting witness for purpose of S. 68 of Evidence Act.
1962 BLJR 939, Overruled.