JAGAT NARAYAN, J. - (1.) THIS is a revision application by the defendant against an order of the Senior Civil Judge, Gangapur, holding that a promissory note for Rs. 5,000/- executed on 26.1.61 and stamped with four one anna stamps was sufficiently stamped and was admissible in evidence.
(2.) I have duly considered the arguments addressed at the Bar and am satisfied that the above decision is erroneous. Under the Rajasthan Court-Fee and Stamp Duty Laws (Extension) Act, 1958 which came into force on 3.4.58 the stamp duty on a promissory note which was formerly four annas was changed to 25 nP. Under sec. 8(b) of the Act it was permissible to use four one anna stamps instated of 25 nP. stamp upto 31.5.59 only. Thereafter the use of four one anna stamps on such a promissory note was not permissible. The Rajasthan Superimposed Stamps Validating Act 1962 merely validated the use of stamps superimposed with the letters "R. S." which could not be used validly in view of rules 3 and 4 of the Rajasthan Stamp Rules 1955. I accordingly hold that the promissory note in suit is insufficiently stamped and is inadmissible in evidence. The receipt below the pronote is to be treated as a separate document altogether despite the fact that it is contained on the same sheet of paper as the pronote. The receipt is also insufficiently stamped for the above reason as it bears two anna stamps instead of one ten naya paisa stamp. The receipt is however admissible in evidence on payment of penalty and can be so admitted. The revision application is accordingly allowed as indicated above. In the circumstances of the case, I direct that parties shall bear their own costs of it. ;