High CourtsDivision Bench(1919) 02 CAL CK 0042

Amolia vs In Re: Ibrahim Ishak

Calcutta High Court · Decided on 4 February 1919 · Citation: (1919) ILR (Cal) 804

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sanderson, C.J · Woodroffe, J

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

3 paragraphs · 105 words

Sanderson, C.J.—In this case learned Counsel has conceded--and I think rightly--that the tenancy was a monthly tenancy and, consequently, it comes within Article 35, Clause (a), Sub-clause (1) of the first Schedule of the Indian Stamp Act: that is to say, "the lease purports to be for a term of less than one year" Therefore, the proper stamp-duty is the same duty as for a bond which is referred to in Article 15; and, inasmuch as the amount is above Rs. 50 and does not exceed is. 100, the proper stamp-duty is eight annas, as the learned Judge has decided.

Woodroffe, J.

2.

I agree.