STRONG CONSTRUCTION Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aforementioned Writ Petitions, listed in bunch as connected cases, on their pleadings, raise a common legal question, viz. 'what Stamp Duty' is chargeable on 'security' deposit in pursuance of a term and condition of an 'agreement' to ensure performance of work-contract in question executed between concerned respective parties in the above Writ Petition? In other words - whether a document/deed furnishing security, as above, should be treated as 'mortgaged deed' under Section 2(17) or a security deed under Article 57(b) of Schedule 1-B, Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (as amended in State of U.P.), called the Act.

(2.) Learned counsel for the parties join in making statement that facts of each case need not be referred and in all the cases only one question of law (as noted above) arises for adjudication by this Court. In the above circumstances, it is not insisted by them to file counter and rejoinder-affidavit in each case. None raised objection on all these cases being heard together and decided finally by a common judgment on the basis of the record (as it stands).

(3.) We shall, therefore, primarily refer to the facts of the case of M/s. Strong Construction v. State of U.P. which is treated as leading case to appreciate the issue in hand which this Court is called upon to adjudicate in the above cases..