SIDDEMEETTI KRISHNA MURTY Vs. COMMISSIONER OF SURVEY SETTLEMENTS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This reference is made by the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority under Section 57 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 regarding the stamp duty payable on a document. The facts, according to the statement of case, set out by the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority are as follows: The petitioners 1 and 3, their brother Siddamsetty Mukteshwar Rao and their father Siddamsetti Ramanatham constituted a firm which came into existence from 1-3-80 to carry on the business of running a cinema hall under the name and style of M/s. Shree Girija Picture Palace at Warangal. The duration of the partnership shall be at will. Out of the five partners three partners ie., the petitioners wanted to retire with effect from 31-3-82 and the remaining two partners who continued to do the business desired to co-opt four other partners and to constitute a new partnership to run business with effect from 1-4-82 and accordingly a document has been drafted. The document is styled as retirement cum-release deed executed between the petitioners in favour of six persons including two partners of the old firm and four other new partners.

(2.) The Chief controlling authority has referred the following question for decision of the High Court:

(3.) As the petitioners were not represented by any counsel we requested Sri V. Parabrahma Sastry, Advocate to assist the court as amicus curio.