LAWS(SC)-1969-2-43

HINDUSTAN STEEL LTD Vs. DILIP CONSTRUCTION CO

Decided On February 18, 1969
HINDUSTAN STEEL LTD Appellant
V/S
DILIP CONSTRUCTION CO. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondents entered into a contract with Hindustan Steel Ltd. for "raising, stacking, carting and loading into wagons limestone at Nandini Mines. Dispute which arose between the parties was referred to arbitration, pursuant to Cl. 61 of the agreement. The arbitrators differed, and the dispute was referred to an umpire who made and published his award on April 19, 1967. The umpire filed the award in the Court of the District Judge, Rajandgaon in the State of Madhya Pradesh and gave notice of the filing of the award to the parties to the dispute. On July 14, 1967, the appellant filed an application for setting aside the award under Sections 30 and 33 of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940. One of the contentions raised by the appellants was that the award was unstamped and on that account "invalid and illegal and liable to be set aside". The respondents then applied to the District Court that the award be impounded and validated by levy of stamp duty and penalty. By order dated September 29, 1967, the District Judge directed that the award be impounded. He then called upon the respondents to pay the appropriate stamp duty on the award and penalty and directed that an authenticated copy of the instrument be sent to the Collector, Durg, together with a certificate in writing stating the receipt of the amount of duty and penalty. Against that order the appellant moved the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction. The High Court rejected the petition and the appellant appeals to this Court with special leave.

(2.) It is urged by Counsel for the appellant that an instrument which is not stamped as required by the Indian Stamp Act, may, on payment of stamp duty and penalty, be admitted in evidence, but cannot be acted upon, for, "the instrument has no existence in the eye of law". Therefore, counsel urged, in proceeding to entertain the application for filing the award, the District Judge, Rajnandagaon, acted without jurisdiction.

(3.) The relevant provisions of the Stamp Act may be summarised. Section 8 of the Act provides: