RAMLAKHAN Vs. RAMBAHADUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff/petitioner is assailing the order dated 26. 2. 2002 passed by First Civil Judge Class II Panna in C. S. No. 14-A/2001 by which the trial Court has impounded the lease document and has ordered payment of stamp duty and penalty, consequently assailing the order the writ petition has been preferred.

(2.) IT is submitted by Shri Pranay Verma, learned counsel appearing for petitioner that as per the exemption carved out under Article 35 of Schedule 1-A of Indian stamp Act, 1899, an agricultural lease for a period of one year is exempt from the payment of stamp duty. The Trial Court has not correctly interpreted Art. 35. It is specifically provided in Art. 35 that when a definite term is expressed and such term does not exceed one year or when the average annual rent reserved does not exceed one hundred rupees. In the instant case the lease was only for the period of one year, thus the document could not have been impounded by the learned Trial Judge, the order being illegal, deserves to be set aside.

(3.) WE have perused the document Ex. P-1. It is an agricultural lease for a period of one year though 19 quintal of wheat was agreed to be paid, in lieu of cultivating land for a period of one year, however, considering the exemption clause of Art. 35 contained in Schedule 1 (a) of Indian Stamp Act, it is apparent that lease for a period of one year is exempted from payment of stamp duty. Exemption clause of Art. 35 is quoted below :-