ABUBACKER LABBAI Vs. CHINNATHAMBI ROWTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The following question has been referred to the Court under Section 57 of the Indian Stamp Act by the Board of Revenue as the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority of the Presidency: Whether the document, a security bond for Rs. 4,500 executed in pursuance of an order of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Tiruvarur, hypothecating also immovable property, should be stamped under Art. 40, Schedule I, or under Art. 57, Schedule I, of the Indian Stamp Act.

(2.) These articles correspond respectively to Articles 33 and 46 of the Madras Stamp Amendment Act of 1922.

(3.) The facts are shortly these. One Abubacker Labbai, Chinnathambi Rowther applied in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Tiruvarur under the Provincial Insolvency Act to be adjudged an insolvent, and under Section 21(1) of that Act was required to give a bond with two sureties for his due appearance in the insolvency proceedings. A bond was accordingly executed by two sureties in favour of the Sheristadar of the Court in the sum of Rs. 4,500 and was stamped under Art. 57 of the Stamp Act, or rather, under the corresponding article of the local Act. The Central Board of Revenue have asked the Court to decide whether this is correct. If Art. 57 does not apply the only other article which can is Art. 40. This is common ground.