MEMBER BOARD OF REVENUE Vs. ARTHUR PAUL BENTHALL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal raised a question under Section 5 of the Indian Stamp Act 2 of 1899. The respondent was, at the material time the Managing Director of Messrs. Bird and Co. Ltd., and of Messrs. F. W. Heilgers and Co.Ltd., which were acting as Managing Agents of several Companies registered under the Indian Companies Act. He was also a Director of a number of the other Companies, and had on occasions acted as liquidator of some Companies, as executor or administrator of estates of deceased persons and as trustees of various estates.

(2.) The statutory provisions bearing on the question are Ss 3 to 60 of the Act. Section 3 is the charging Section, and it enacts that subject to certain exemptions, every instrument mentioned in the Schedule to the Act shall be chargeable with the duty of the amount indicated therein as the proper duty therefor.

(3.) The point for decision in this appeal is as to the meaning to be given to the words distinct matters" in S. 5. The contention of the respondent which found favour with the majority of the learned Judges in the court below is that the word " matters" in Section 5 is synonymus with the word "description" occurring in S. 6, and that they both refer to the several categories of instruments which are set out in the Schedule.