THOMAS GEORGE Vs. V.V. GEORGEKUTTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Whether an unstamped document can be impounded under the provisions of the Kerala Stamp Act, 1959 and what would be the legal effect of Section 35 of the said Act, when it was admitted in evidence without any objection or rejecting any objection, are the questions came up for consideration in this appeal.

(2.) A suit for recovery of money was decreed by both the courts below, against which the defendant came up with this appeal. Ext. A5 is an unstamped document relied on by the plaintiff. It was accepted as a bond by the trial court and the first appellate court, after impounding the same and decreed the suit.

(3.) The High Court of Allahabad in Chotey v. Girrj Kishore (AIR 1926 All 359) had taken the view that an unstamped document unless it is admissible under some other provisions of law, is mere waste paper for the purpose of judicial proceedings. But the High Court of Madras in Subramanian Chettiar v. Revenue Divisional Officer, Devakottah (AIR 1956 Mad. 454) took a slightly different view by holding that an unstamped or defectively stamped document is not void and it is effective from the date of its execution though it is incapable of being made use of as evidence until it is stamped properly. But in that decision, no distinction was drawn between an unstamped document and a defectively stamped document (insufficiently stamped document. Further, the question whether an unstamped document can be impounded was not come up for consideration in that decision.