Ramaprasada Rao, C.J. - (1.) This reference by the Chief Controlling Revenue 'Authority, Board of Revenue, Mad under Sec. 57 of the Indian Stamp Act, IBM, arises under the following circumstances: The petitioner is the Chief Controlling Revenue. Authority, and the respondent is one K. S. Dwarakanathan. The respondent obtained an assignment of a decree from one Thirumathi G. Rathnavalli an 1711-1977. The decree itself was passed in an original suit,O.S. 7230 of 1972, on the file of the City Civil Court, Madras. That decree was in favour of G. Rathnavalli, under which the defendant in that suit was directed to pay a sum of Rs. 12,853 with further interest as specified therein and the said deposit was to be made by 19-6-1976. It is this decree which Rathnavalli had obtained which was assigned in favour of the respondent in these Proceedings by document No. P. .312/77 dated. 16-11-1971 registered in the books of the joint Sub Registration I Saidapet, Madras. The said deed was engrossed on non judicial stamp paper of the value of Re. 25. According to the statement of the case made by the petitioner (Chief Revenue Controlling Authority) the decree was assigned for a consideration Of Rs. .10,000/-while the amount of the decree together with costs as indicated in the schedule to the document itself was Rs. 20,296. The registering authority was of the view that the document was in the nature of a conveyance for the consideration mentioned in the schedule to the document and would not a" that the deed was properly stamped as a release deed. The Joint Sub Registrar therefore, impounded the document and referred it for adjudication to the District Registrar of Assurances, Madras (South). The District Registrar, holding the same view as the Joint Sub-Registrar, issued a show cause notice to the respondent, directing him to pay a stamp duty of Rs. 1,624, under Article 23 (3) of Schedule I to the Indian Stamp Act, The respondent would not seriously dispute that the document could be treated as a conveyance, but, according to him as the consideration paid under the document for the transfer was only Rupees 10,000/-, the stamp duty, even it were to be treated as a sale deed was chargeable only on the actual consideration of Rs. 10,000/-. The District Registrar would not, however, agree with the respondent, but treated the document as a conveyance for Rs. 20,296/-, and by his proceedings dated 2612-1977, called upon the respondent to pay the additional stamp duty if the document were to be registered in the normal course.
(2.) Aggrieved by the order of the District Registrar, the respondent approached the petitioner. There again the respondent repeated the contention that the Joint Sub-Registrar could not substitute the consideration as recited in the document of conveyance, even if the document were to be treated as such and contended that, if at all, a duty on Rs. 10,000/-, alone could be charged and not the duty chargeable over the value of the decree as shown in the schedule to the document. The petitioner, however, rejected the revision petition of the respondent and upheld the District Registrar's order. As against this the respondent filed an application on 18-6-1978 , requesting the petitioner to refer :the case to this court under Section 57(1) of the Stamp Act. The question. referred to us is- "Whether the stamp duty payable on the assignment of decree is at 8 per cent as a deed of conveyance on the actual decree amount found payable as on that date or only on the actual consideration received viz. Rs. 10,000/- by the assignor for the transfer of decree". The recitals in the document show that Rathnavalli, as assignor under the deed, was unable to find funds for the realisation of the fruits of the decree by conducting further proceedings, accepted he offer of the respondent and agreed to assign the decree for a sum and consideration of Rs. 10,000/- the receipt of which she acknowledged. Under the deed, the respondent is enabled to collect the entire decree amount with costs which he might incur, without recourse to the assignor.
(3.) In its order, the petitioner was of the view that each case had to be decided on its own merits and that it was open to the registering authority to arrive at a reasonable assessment of the value of the subject matter conveyed or covered by a document. According to the petitioner, the provisions of the Indian Stamp Act enable the authorities to determine the -stamp duty payable on instruments and to opine, after considering the recitals in a given document, as to what would 'be the probable stamp duty that has to be charged, having regard to the nature of the transaction and the value of the subject matter of the involved transaction. Reference is made to Section 64 of the Act and it is contended that the Revenue can and should have power to arrive at an opinion that the executant has acted with intent to deprive the Government of the proper stamp duty. The petitioner (Board) also expressed the view that, though the Collector was not empowered to conduct on elaborate enquiry as it would be burdensome to do so, yet if intrinsically the consideration recited in a document is inadequate, the impounding authority has the requisite power duly to assess the stamp duty. In these circumstances, as it is admitted by the - respondent that the transaction would come within the description of conveyance and what was conveyed was a decree for a specified, sum, the transaction has to be viewed as a conveyance for the decree amount, and even though the decree has been. assigned for a lesser sum, that ought not to be, the, sole guide for., the determination of stamp duty.;