MANSUR ALI Vs. HABIBUR RAHMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. A. Wahed, the learned counsel for the appellant. None appeared for the Respondent despite adequate opportunities given on different occasions.

(2.) THIS appeal is directed against the concurrent findings of the learned Courts below. The Respondent Md. Habibur Rahman as plaintiff filed Money Suit No. 6/94 in the Court of the Munsiff No. 2 at Mangaldoi for recovery of Rs. 2750/- on the basis of a pro-note executed by the defendant on 21. 5. 92. The learned Munsiff decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiff. The judgment and decree passed by the learned Munsiff has been confirmed by the learned first appellate Court. This appeal has been preferred against the said judgments for hearing on the following substantial questions of law :-

(3.) THE aforesaid document was admitted in evidence and tendered as Ext. 1 without any objection from the appellant-defendant. The admissibility of the document was challenged on the ground that the pro-note could not be acted upon as it was not properly stamped. The objection was founded on the proviso to Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. The learned Courts below rejected the objection on the ground that the document was tendered in evidence without any objection and, as such, this question cannot be raised either before the trial Court or before the appellate Court.