- (1.) Heard Sri B.D. Mandhyan, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Om Prakash, Advocate for petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
(2.) The short and important question of law which has engaged attention of this Court in this writ petition which has been preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution is, "whether the document in question (Annexure-1 to the writ petition) is chargeable with stamp duty under Article 57 or Article 40 of Schedule 1-B, Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act, 1899").
(3.) The Collector (Prescribed Authority)/Deputy Collector, Nautanwa, District Maharajganj vide order dated 10.04.1997 has held that the document in question is a simple mortgage deed chargeable for stamp duty under Article 40, Schedule 1-B of Act, 1899 and this order has been confirmed by Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Board of Revenue, U.P., Allahabad vide order dated 10.08.2001, passed in Stamp Revision No. 59/1997-98 preferred by petitioner, which has been dismissed.;