| Case ID |
43097c15-0885-4708-8826-0b855309432f |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
R.FA. No. 5 of 1992/BWP |
| Decision Date |
Apr 24, 1993 |
| Hearing Date |
Apr 24, 1993 |
| Decision |
The Lahore High Court accepted the appeal of Muhammad Afzal, ruling that the promissory note and receipt, although stamped in different places on the same printed form, were duly stamped and admissible in evidence. The court emphasized that the Stamp Act does not specify the locations for affixing stamps, and the underlying purpose is to ensure the payment of duties on instruments. The previous court's dismissal of the suit was found to be erroneous, and the case was remitted for fresh consideration on merits. |
| Summary |
In the case of R.FA. No. 5 of 1992/BWP, the Lahore High Court addressed issues surrounding the admissibility of a promissory note and receipt that were part of the same document but stamped in different locations. Muhammad Afzal, the appellant, sought recovery based on a promissory note dated August 15, 1989, for Rs. 8,00,000. The respondent, Muhammad Aslam, contested the suit, claiming the promissory note was insufficiently stamped. The court clarified that the Stamp Act of 1899 does not dictate specific locations for stamp affixation and ruled in favor of the appellant, emphasizing the importance of ensuring compliance with the Act's intent to secure duty payments. This decision underscores the necessity for clarity in the execution of financial instruments and the interpretation of legal statutes. The case cites precedents including Sajida Abbas Zaidi v. Irshad Ali Jafri and Sheikhupura Central Cooperative Bank Limited v. Tawakal Ullah, reinforcing the legal standards applicable to stamp duty and the admissibility of documents. This ruling is significant for legal practitioners and scholars in understanding the nuances of the Stamp Act and its application in civil procedures. |
| Court |
Lahore High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
MIAN ALLAH NAWAZ,
MIAN ABDUL KHALIQ
|
| Lawyers |
Ch. Abdul Rashid Javaid,
Ch. Naseer Ahmad
|
| Petitioners |
MUHAMMAD AFZAL
|
| Respondents |
MUHAMMAD ASLAM
|
| Citations |
1994 SLD 1045,
1994 CLC 1465
|
| Other Citations |
1990 CLC 1018,
PLD 1977 Lah. 763,
AIR 1961 Mad. 504
|
| Laws Involved |
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908),
Stamp Act (II of 1899)
|
| Sections |
Order XXXVII, Rule 2,
Order XXXVII, Rule 3,
Section 6,
Section 35
|