BAPNA, J. - (1.) THIS is a second appeal by the plaintiffs in a suit for recovery of money.
(2.) THE appellants sued the respondent for recovery of Rs. 411/- consisting of the principal sum of Rs. 300/-plus 111/-by way of interest on the basis of a document Ex. P-l dated Besakh Sudi 11, S. 1997. THE respondent contested the suit and inter alia raised the plea that the document which was the basis of the suit was inadmissible in evidence. THE trial court held that, the document was an acknowledgment within the meaning of Art. 1, Schdl. 1 of the Indian Stamp Act, and under the Marwar Stamp Act of 1914 in force on the date of the execution of the document, it required a stamp of one anna and being not so stamped was inadmissible in evidence under the new Act which was in force at the time when the question of its admissibility arose during the pendency of the suit. THE suit was accordingly dismissed and the same judgment was upheld on appeal. It is argued for the appellants that the document did not require any stamp and in any case as provided by the Marwar Act of 1914, duty and penalty had been paid at the time of the institution of the suit on 1. 5. 1947 when that Act was still in force and the document was, therefore, admissible. The law in Marwar both before and after the institution of the suit had provisions corresponding to Art. 1, Schdl. 1, of the Indian Stamp Act and the first question for consideration is whether the document is one which was liable to stamp duty of one anna under the corresponding law in Marwar and for this purpose the nature of the document has to be looked into. In the plaintiff's Bahi this is a Khata in which entries start from Svt. 1994 and it opens with a debit balance, against the defendant and his father, of Rs. 275/10/ -. Various items are debited all of which bear the signatures of the defendant and certain items are credited resulting in a debit balance of Rs. 300/- on Besakh Sudi 9, Svt. 1995. This balance bears the signature of the father of defendant. Interest is debited and the balance of Rs. 300/- is carried over on Besakh Sudi 11, Svt. 1996. Again, certain items of interest are debited and an equal amount of payment is credited and the balance of Rs. 300/- is carried over on Besakh Sudi 11, Svt. 1997 which bears the signature of Ratanlal, the defendant. This last balance has been made the basis of the suit and it is this document which has been held to be liable to Stamp duty under Art. 1, Schdl. 1, of the Indian Stamp Act and corresponding provisions of the Marwar law. The entry translated in English is as follows: - "the balance payable Rs. 300/- up to Besakh Sudi 11, 1997: Sd. Ratanlal. " That this is an acknowledgment does not admit of any doubt but the point for consideration is whether this is an acknowledgment which requires an anna stamp. It is clear from the language of Art. 1, Schdl. 1 of the Indian Stamp Act that an acknowledgment which requires an anna stamp should be one which is brought into existence in order to supply an evidence of such debt. A distinction should be drawn between an admission of the correctness of an account and an acknowledgment for the purpose of supplying evidence of a debt. It is only in the latter case that the Article will apply and it is a question of intention of the parties under which category an instrument falls. The intention is prima facie to be gathered from the document itself. In the present case, the debt was advanced some time prior to Svt. 1994 as in the Khata the opening balance is also an acknowledgment of an outstanding debt. It is a cardinal principle of interpretation that statutes imposing pecuniary burdens should be construed strictly and the subject is not to be taxed unless the statute imposes the charge in clear and unambiguous language and in a case of reasonable doubt, the construction most beneficial to the subject is to be adopted. If the tenor of the entire Khata is looked into, it appears to me that the acknowledgment seems to have been obtained for verification that the account was correct and I am unable to hold that it was obtained in order to supply evidence of the debt. Even in a case of doubt, the benefit it is to be given to the subject under the rule of interpretation stated above. The document, therefore, did not require an anna stamp. Certain authorities were cite at the Bar but since each document is to be construed according to the language used, the authorities are not of much assistance. On the second point, the law in force on the date of the institution of the suit was the Marwar Stamp Act of 1914. It did not contain any provision corresponding to proviso A to sec. 35 of the Indian Stamp Act which prohibited the admission in evidence of an instrument chargeable with the duty of one anna unless it was properly stamped. On the other hand, every kind of unstamped document would be admitted in evidence on the payment of proper of deficit stamp duty together with the penalty, and the penalty was eight times the amount of proper stamp duty in case of unstamped instrument and five times the amount of deficit stamp duty in case of an instrument not properly stamped. This is the result of reading sec. 9 with sec. 11 of Marwar Stamp Act 1914. It appears from a perusal of the record that the plaintiff had paid stamp duty and the penalty of nine annas when he produced the document. This was, therefore sufficient compliance with the provisions of the Marwar Stamp Act. It was argued on behalf of the defendant that the attention of the court was not drawn to the payment of such duty and penalty and there is no order on the record to show that the court had accepted it. It is, however, clear from the record that in this case the defendant himself was the presiding officer of the court and he did not take any steps which as a presiding officer he was bound to take in a matter of this kind. Although the plaint was presented on the 1st May, the presiding officer recorded the order on 12th July that as the presiding officer was defendant in the case, the reference may be made to Chief Court for transfer of the case. The plaintiffs, therefore, were not at fault if the proper order was not passed by the presiding officer when the duty and penalty was tendered. On the second ground also the document became admissible in evidence on the date of the presentation of the plaint. The law was subsequently amended in Marwar by introduction of Marwar Stamp Act, 1947 which contains provisions corresponding to sec. 35 of the Indian Stamp Act in its entirety, but if the document was admissible at an earlier stage by full compliance of the Stamp Act that was in force at that time, it would not become inadmissible by subsequent changes in law. The appeal is, therefore, accepted, the judgment of the two courts below are set aside, and the case is sent back to the trial court for decision on merits. The costs of this appeal and those of the lower courts will abide the result. Mr. Ratanlal, defendant, wants a certificate for appeal to a Division Bench under sec. 18 (2) of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance. The question involved is one of law and is of general importance. I certify that the case is a fit one for appeal. . ;