Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per Indian Stamp (Madhya Pradesh) Amendment Act 2014, Stamp Duty of 2% award amount, or market value of the property to which the award related, whichever is higher, has to be paid. The learned counsel further relies on a judgment of this Court in the case of M.P. Stock Exchange Vs. CMC Limited, reported in 2011 (2) MPHT 374. It is further contended that an Award in an "instrument" in terms of section 2 (14) of the Indian Stamp Act, hence, Stamp Duty is leviable thereon.

9. The judgment of this Court in the case of M.P. Stock Exchange Vs. CMC Limited, reported in 2011 (2) MPHT 374, in fact relies on an earlier judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. Vs. Dilip Construction Company, reported in 1969 (1) SCC 597. The aforesaid two judgments are authorities on the point that an Award is an "instrument" in terms of section 2 (14) of the Indian Stamp Act 1899, and that the objection as to insufficiency of Stamp Duty can be looked into at the time of enforcement of the Award.