Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

10) Now the issue to be considered in this revision is whether demarking of Ex.A.5 is proper on the ground that it is suffering on account of insufficient stannp duty and being bar of Section 17(1) of the Indian Registration Act?

11) For proper adjudication of this issue, it is relevant and desirable to look into Sections 35 and 36 of the Indian Stamp Act.

Section 35 of the Act as extracted herein under:

"Instruments not duly stamped inadmissible in evidence^ etc:- No instrument chargeable with duty shall be admitted in evidence for any purpose by any person having by law or consent of parties authority to receive evidence, or shall be acted upon, registered or authenticated by any such person or by any public officer, unless such instrument is duly stamped:

17. In paragraph 20 of the above ruling their lordships have clearly drawn distinction as to nature of objections with reference to admissibility of documents, classifying into two. One is, in respect per se inadmissible nature of the document and another is, in respect of procedure viz., the mode of proof of a document sought to be introduced in evidence. White Section 35 of the Stamp Act provides a bar for a document to be admitted in evidence if it is not properly stamped. Section 36 speaks of impact and effect of admission of the same document in evidence, though it did not meet the requirements under Section 35 of the Stamp Act. Thus, Section 36 of the Stamp Act is also substantive in nature. Therefore, once a document is / admitted in evidence despite suffering on account of deficiency in relation to Stamp Act, it cannot be recalled to its original status.

19. Judicial deternnination of admissibility of document, within purview of Section 35 and Section 36 of the Stamp Act is referred in the above ruling of Supreme Court, observing that the Court admitted the document in evidence, when it is tendered in evidence, under the signature of the Presiding Judge of the Court. The requirement appearing in this context is a conscious and perceptible consideration of the nature of the document particularly having regard to the effect of Section 35 and 36 of Stamp Act. In this context, it is desirable to bear in mind the observations of Sri Justice P.Satyanarayana Raju in Mantrala Simhadri Vs. Palli Varalakshmi and Ors.^ as to what shall be the process of judicial determination in respect of a document exhibited in the course of trial or enquiry in the Court and it is extracted below.

21. A careful reading and understanding of rulings of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Javer Chand V Pukhraj Surana and R.V.E.Venkatachala Sounder leave no manner of doubt that the bar under Section 36 of Stamp Act in respect of an instrument, once admitted in evidence, stands. It did not and cannot pale to insignificance. Once a document admitted in evidence it gets insulated thereunder, from the operation of Section 35 of the Stamp Act, subject to exception laid down in Section 36 itself.