Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (0.25 seconds)Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
The Registration Act, 1908
M. Krishnan And 44 Others vs The District Collector, Erode ... on 6 November, 1997
29.Number of judgments have been relied on at the bar. We have also
discussed the decision rendered by the learned Single Judge, as he then was,
in Krishnan, M. v. The District Collector, Erode District [1998 (III) CTC
366]. The fact involved therein is different. However, we find the
discussions made in paragraph 71 with respect to retention of document after
completing registration of the document, cannot be accepted as a correct
position of law. There is no question of retention by the registering
authority. He merely has to send it along with other records to the Collector
for adjudication.
State Of Rajasthan & Ors vs M/S Khandaka Jain Jewellers on 16 November, 2007
31.Reliance has been made on the decision of the Division Bench in Writ
Appeal (MD) No.1346 of 2016 dated 17.10.2016. However, the decision of the
Apex Court in State of Rajasthan v. Khandaka Jain Jewellers (SC) [2008 (1)
CTC 60] and the relevant provisions were not brought to the knowledge of the
Division Bench. The Division Bench also did not take notice of the Scope of
Section 47-A (1) of Indian Stamp Act with specific reference to the issue as
to whether a reference also includes the instrument or not. Though Rules 4
and 7 of the Tamil Nadu State (Prevention of Undervaluation of Instruments)
Rules, 1968 were taken note of, there was no consideration thereto. After
all, a decision can be binding precedent, only if an issue comes up for
conscious consideration. Thus, we are of the considered view that the said
decision is not a binding precedent.