Decided on January 19,1953

In Re: Venkataswami Aiya Appellant
STATE Respondents


Ramaswami, J. - (1.) THIS criminal revision case is preferred against the conviction and sentence in C. C. No. 10 of 1951 on the file of the Additional First Class Magistrate, Kollegal, from which C. A. No. 1 of 1952 was filed before the Sessions Judge, Colmbatore, wherein the conviction was confirmed and the sentence was modified.
(2.) THE facts are: One Chinna Malappa executed a settlement deed Ex. p. 10 on 29 -7 -1950. It was written by Venkataswami Aiyah, karnam of Ikkadahali village, Kollegal taluk. The document was registered as No. 3937 of 3950 of Book 1 of the Sub -Registrar of Kollegal. The value of the property as set forth in the document is Rs. 2000. The District Registrar initiated the prosecution of both these persons under Section 27 read with Section 64, Stamp Act on the foot that the property had been grossly under -valued. The executant died on 2 -8 -1950. The case against him abated. The enquiry proceeded against this scribe only. Both the Courts below found that this accused was guilty as charged and sentenced him to pay a fine. The Additional First Class Magistrate fined him Rs. 100 and the Sessions Judge reduced it to Rs. 50. This conviction is challenged in this criminal revision case on the following grounds, viz., (a) that there has been no valid sanction for the institution of the complaint, and (b) that the circumstances alleged against this scribe do not make out the offence contemplated by Section 27 and Section 64, Stamp Act.
(3.) POINT (a): There is no substance in this point because though it is quite true that originally under the Standing Orders 101 and 102, embodied in the Madras Stamp Manual containing the Indian Stamp Act and the Court -fees Act, with the Notifications issued thereunder and the Board's Standing Orders connected therewith (4th Edn.1933) only Collectors and Revenue Divisional Officers are found to have been authorised under Section 70, Stamp Act to sanction prosecutions in respect of offences punishable under the Stamp Act. Subsequently the District Registrars have also been so authorised. Ex. P -12 is the copy of G. O. Ms. No. 3306, Revenue dated 28 -12 -1949 in which the Local Government accepted the recommendation of the Board of Revenue to authorise the District Magistrate under Section 70, Stamp Act to sanction prosecution. Exhibit P -13 is copy of the proceedings of the Board of Revenue Ref. No, 3129 -50 dated 17 -5 -1950 empowering District Magistrate to sanction prosecution. Therefore, there is no substance in the contention about the want of proper sanction for the complaint being launched by the District Registrar.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.