RAJINDER KUMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two petitions call in question the power of the audit party to seek recovery of some arrears in payment of stamp duty and also the warrants of demand issued by the Sub -Registrar in consequence to the findings of the audit party.

(2.) IN writ petition No. 327/198!, the petitioner received on over -draft facility of Rs.15,000 from the Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd; Kishtwar (hereinafter called the bank). The petitioner under an agreement hypothecated his stocks -in trade to the bank and executed a hypothecation deed dated 9 -10 -1979 in favour of the bank as primary/principal security. In addition to this hypothecation deed, the petitioner also mortgaged the property by way of a mortgage deed dated 8 -10 -1979. The petitioner calls this mortgage to be a collateral security. The mortgage deed was registered by the Sub Registrar, Kishtwar, on 9 -10 -1979 under Article 14 (c) of Schedule to the Stamp Act. 1977. Same was duly accepted and registered by the Sub -Register Kithtwar. An Audit party conducted an inspection of the Court of Sub -Registrar (Sub Judge), Kishtwar. The party held that the collateral security fell within the amplitude of Art. 40(d) and not Art. 40(c) of the Schedule to the Stamp Act and was required to be stamped as a bond. It was held that the instrument was insufficiently stamped to the tune of Rs. 234.90

(3.) SIMILARLY , Sub -Registrar (Munsif), Nowsehra, issued recovery war -rants against the petitioner in writ petition No. 195 of 1982 to the tune of Rs. 4147.50 again basing the same recovery on the test check made by the audit party