PEDDYREDDY ESWARAMMA Vs. NALLAVARAPU CHANDRA REDDY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition arose against the order of the lower Court dated 22. 8. 2007 passed regarding the admissibility of the document dated 11. 10. 2004. The lower Court held that the said document comes within the definition of bond as defined under Section 2 (5) of Indian Stamp act, therefore, directed the Office to collect stamp duty and penalty over the said document by treating it as a bond.

(2.) BEING aggrieved by the order of the lower Court, the plaintiff preferred the present revision petition. The learned Counsel for the revision petitioner Sri C. Venkateswarlu representing Sri C. Ramachandra Raju, submitted that the document referred in the impugned order is only an acknowledgement of receipt of the amount and it cannot be treated as a bond.

(3.) SECTION 2 (5) of the Act defines 'bond' which reads as follows: