validity of the stamp paper
deepak
(Querist) 16 March 2009
This query is : Resolved
Respected Sirs,
Is there any provision in the Stamp Act whereby the stamp paper purchased shall be used (executed) / valid for certain prescribed period only from the date of its purchase.
(i.e. validity of Un-executed stamp papers)
if yes what is the period of validity from the date of purchase under:
1. the Bombay Stamp Act,
2. Under the Indian Stamp Act, and
3. under the West Bengal Stamp Act (if there is one in WB) [as i am not sure as to any stamp Act in WB]
4. Under the Stamp Rule.
Please revert.
Thanking you
Regards
Deep@k
anantha krishna n.v. Advocate
(Expert) 17 March 2009
In this forum itself elsewhere there is a reference. Please see this link.
http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/message_display.asp?group_id=3605
deepak
(Querist) 17 March 2009
I will be highly obliged if you can give the details as to relevant section / provision of the Stamp Act (Central and State Stamp Act both). and / or judgment of the SC
Manish Singh
(Expert) 17 March 2009
if the state act provides for any validity/ limitation sections, then that limitation shall prevail otherwise there is no vailidity period to use a stamp papaer.it has been held by the Apex court.
eg the maharashtra stamp act provides validity for six months. check respective state acts to conclude.
sanjeev murthy desai
(Expert) 17 March 2009
i agree with Mr. Manish,
beacuse stamp paper dont have any limitation period.
A. A. JOSE
(Expert) 17 March 2009
I agree with Mr.Manish singh that 6 months validity is there in certain state acts.
Sushil Kumar Bhatia
(Expert) 19 March 2009
The stamp paper has no expiry date it is settle by honble Supreme court If unused stamp submits for refund then its expiry date is six month from the date of purchase under Indian stamp act
sanjay singh thakur
(Expert) 21 March 2009
Dear Deepak
I agree with the expert opinion of Mr. Sushil Kumar Bhatia because this actually is the legal position.
SANJAY DIXIT
(Expert) 23 March 2009
Mr Manish and Sushil have given the perfect replies. You may get the relevant judgment of apex court in "Judiciary" section of this site.
Hiralal Das
(Expert) 04 April 2009
Thanks all of you. I agree with the opinions of my learned members friend. You may follow them which should the proper ways to solve the problem.
mahendra rai jain
(Expert) 12 April 2009
No limitation for use of stamp paper
Court : Supreme Court of India
Brief : : No impediment for a stamp paper purchased more than six months prior to the proposed date of execution, being used for a document
Citation :
Judgment :
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIAWrit Petition (Civil) No. 290 of 2001Decided On: 19.02.2008Appellants: Thiruvengada PillaiVs.Respondent: Navaneethammal and Anr.Hon'ble Judges: R.V. Raveendran and P. Sathasivam, JJ.Counsels: For Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff: Sunita Sharma, Adv.For Respondents/Defendant: K.K. Mani, C.K.R. Lenin Sekar and Mayur R. Shah, Advs.Subject: ContractActs/Rules/Orders: Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 45, 47 and 73; Indian Stamp Act, 1899 - Sections 35, 37 and 54; Indian Stamp Rules, 1925Cases Referred: State (Delhi Administration) v. Pali Ram; Ajit Savant Majagvai v. State of Karnataka; Murari Lal v. State of Madhya Pradesh 1980 (1) SCC 704; Lalit Popli v. Canara Bank and Ors.; O. Bharathan v. K. Sudhakaran Prior History: From the Judgment and Order dated 17/2/1999 of the High Court of Judicature at Madras in S.A. No. 696/1987Disposition: Appeal dismissedCiting Reference: * Mentioned*** DiscussedState (Delhi Administration) v. Pali Ram ***Ajit Savant Majagvai v. State of Karnataka ***Murari Lal v. State of Madhya Pradesh ***Lalit Popli v. Canara Bank and Ors. ***O. Bharathan v. K. Sudhakaran *Case Note:Civil - Specific performance - Validity of - Stamp paper - Opinion of experts - Section 54 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 - Indian Stamp Rules, 1925 - Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Plaintiff-Appellant alleged that the First Defendant agreed to sell suit property by an agreement and received some amount as advance - Plaintiff issued a notice to execute the sale deed and receive the balance amount - Defendant denied the agreement and executed the sale deed in favour of Second Defendant - Plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance - Defendant contended that the sale agreement put forth by the Plaintiff was forged and concocted - Trial Court dismissed the suit on the ground that the sale put forth by Plaintiff was false - High Court allowed the second appeal filed by the Second Defendant restoring the decision of the Trial Court - Hence, present appeal - Whether the agreement of sale executed on two stamp papers purchased on different dates and more than six months prior to date of execution is not valid - Whether the first Appellate Court was justified in comparing the disputed thumb impression with the admitted thumb impression and recording a finding about the authenticity of the thumb impression, without the benefit of any opinion of an expert - Whether the High Court erred in reversing the Judgment of the first Appellate Court in second appeal - Held, the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 nowhere prescribes any expiry date for use of a stamp paper - No impediment for a stamp paper purchased more than six months prior to the proposed date of execution, being used for a document - Indian Stamp Rules, 1925 applicable to Tamil Nadu, do not contain any provision that the stamp papers of required value should be purchased together from the same vendor with consecutive serial numbers - Fact that very old stamp papers of different dates have been used, may certainly be a circumstance that can be used as a piece of evidence to cast doubt on the authenticity of the agreement, but that cannot be a clinching evidence; - When there is a positive denial by the person who is said to have affixed his finger impression and where the finger impression in the disputed document is vague or smudgy or not clear, making it difficult for comparison, the Court should hesitate to venture a decision based on its own comparison of the disputed and admitted finger impressions - Court should avoid reaching conclusions based on a mere casual or routine glance or perusal - Finding by the first Appellate Court, recorded without the benefit of any expert opinion, merely on a casual perusal, was unsound
adv. rajeev ( rajoo )
(Expert) 17 March 2009
RAKHI BUDHIRAJA ADVOCATE
(Expert) 17 March 2009
