Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 12 (0.19 seconds)The Indian Stamp Act, 1899
Section 36 in The Indian Stamp Act, 1899 [Entire Act]
Section 27 in The Indian Stamp Act, 1899 [Entire Act]
Section 64 in The Indian Stamp Act, 1899 [Entire Act]
The Registration Act, 1908
Javer Chand And Others vs Pukhraj Surana on 25 April, 1961
4. The learned counsel, therefore, argues that now that the document has been admitted for whatever reason it might be, it is not open for the trial Court or for that matter, any other Court to object to receiving that document in evidence, on the ground that surcharge has not been paid on it. He invites our attention to the decision of the Supreme Court in Javer Chand v. Pukhraj Surna, and that of the High Court of Andhra in N. Basavaiah Naidu v. T. Venkateswaru, 1956 Andh WR 490 = (AIR 1957 Andh Pra 1022).
Article 20 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Attili Venkanna vs Parasuram Byas Trading Under The Name Of ... on 1 February, 1929
"The question as to whether a document has been admitted or not depends upon the facts of each case. Where, as was the case in Venkanna v. Parasuram Byas, ILR 53 Mad 137 = AIR 1929 Mad 522 the clerk of the Court made the endorsement or where, as in the decision rendered by Mr. Justice Satyanarayana Rao, the admission was tentative, there can be no difficulty and it is open to the Court to consider the question of the admissibility of the document at the subsequent stage."