JAGMAIL SINGH Vs. GAJJU SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against the order of the Sub-Judge Ist Class, Nabha, dated 4th May, 1977, whereby he declined to exhibit in evidence the pronote marked 'A' on the ground that it was insufficiently stamped. The pronote was considered to be insufficiently stamped on the ground that the additional stamp qua 'refugee stamp' required to be affixed on the pronote by Section 2 of the President Act No. 24 of 1971 (adding Section 3-B after Section 3A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 ) was, though, affixed in addition to the earlier required stamps but this stamp was not cancelled. Applying the decision of Division Bench of Lahore High Court in Sohan Lal etc. v. Raghunath, 1934 AIR(Lah) 606 it was held by virtue of the provisions of Section 12 of the Stamp Act that any instrument with uncancelled stamp shall be deemed to be considered to that extent as unstamped.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the provisions of Section 3-B of the Stamp Act clearly exempted the promissory note from bearing the 'refugee stamp', and since the pronote otherwise bore the requisite stamp which was duly cancelled, the Trial Court erred in holding the pronote to be insufficiently stamped and consequently in declining to exhibit it in evidence.

(3.) The provisions of Section 3-B of the Stamp Act are in the following terms :-