Naresh Kumar v. Daya Nand

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Date of Order: 25.03.2010 CM(M) No.60 of 2010 %

25.03.2010

NARESH KUMAR

... Petitioner

Through: Proxy Counsel for Mr. D.S. Dalal,

Advocate

Versus

DAYA NAND

... Respondent

Through: Nemo.

JUSTICE SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA

¶1Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶2To be referred to the reporter or not?

¶3Whether judgment should be reported in Digest? ORAL

¶1The applicant has approached this Court against an order whereby an application of the applicant made under Section 33 of Indian Stamp Act for impounding of a General Power of Attorney (GPA) was dismissed by the Trial Court.

¶2The GPA placed on the record of the Trial Court by respondent is a registered GPA executed on Rs. 100/- stamp paper. The contention of the petitioner before the Trial Court was that since along with GPA, an Agreement to Sell, a Will and a Receipt were also executed, the GPA was for a consideration and therefore was liable to bear stamp duty @ 8% of consideration. Since it was executed only on Rs.100/- stamp paper, it was liable to be impounded

¶3Under Section 33 of Indian Stamp Act, a document can be impounded by a Court if it does not bear the stamp duty which it legally should. In order to show what should be the value of stamp duty, the document is to be read in its entirety and if the GPA shows that it was executed for some consideration but does bear necessary stamp duty, the Court then would have power to impound it and send it to Collector of Stamps for evaluating the stamp duty to be affixed on GPA and for penalty to be imposed. It is not the case of the petitioner that the document in its text shows any consideration having been paid. The document gives power to manage the property including power to transfer the property to third party but it does not show that this Power of Attorney was executed for any consideration. The court cannot read the consideration mentioned in other documents to impound the GPA. If other documents executed between the parties are produced before the Court and Court considers them insufficiently stamped, the court can exercise its jurisdiction to impound them, but on the basis of other documents court cannot impound GPA.

¶4I consider that the Trial Court rightly dismissed the application under Section 33 of Indian Stamp Act for impounding GPA. However, that would not stand in the way of Trial Court in impounding other documents if relied upon by the respondent if the same do not bear requisite stamp duty. This petition is dismissed.

March 25, 2010

SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA, J. acm