SIDHNATH MEHROTRA Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a reference by the Board of Revenue under Section 57 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899.

(2.) SEVERAL persons, who were carrying on business in the name of Messrs. Munna Lall and Sons, were lessees of a plot of land situated in Qasimganj, Kanpur. On a portion of that plot they had constructed an oil mill known as Sri Govind Oil Mills. In another portion they had an ice and cold storage factory in respect of which they had taken two persons Sri Shyam Sunder Gupta and Sri Satya Prakasli Gupta as their partners. The entire land as well as the constructions standing upon it were equitably mortgaged with the Chartered Bank of India, Australia and China in the year 1938.

(3.) IT is thus clear that though in the preliminary clauses there is a recital in respect of the other properties which had also been transferred in connection with the same transaction, e.g. machinery, stores and goodwill the deed was being executed only to effect the transfer of the immovable properties described therein. In fact, a registered sale deed was required only in respect of the immovable property that was being conveyed. The other properties could be transferred even without a deed. In the first term of the deed, therefore, the vendors described in detail what they purported to "sell, transfer and assign" to the vendees and at the end of the deed they describe the properties "hereby conveyed taken as a whole".