KUNHIRAMA KURUP Vs. KUNHIKANNAN NAIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this petition I am called upon to decide the question whether Ext. P. 1 kurippu is admissible in evidence. The suit is for the balance due to the plaintiff from the defendant on account of dealings in cocoanuts. The accounts between them were settled and on the 23rd November 1955 the kurippu was executed by the defendant. It reads as follows; The defendant denied the execution of the kurippu and also objected to its admissibility under S. 35 of the Stamp Act as it is a document requiring a stamp of one anna under Schedule I Art. I of the Stamp Act. The learned Munsiff over -ruled the objection and admitted the document.

(2.) ART . I, Schedule I of the Indian Stamp Act reads thus:

(3.) THE Learned Counsel for the plaintiff questions the competency of the revision because of the bar of Section 36 of the Stamp Act. Section 36 of the Stamp Act enjoins that: -