B KNARAYANA SINGH Vs. H HMOHUM SHUMSHERE JUNG BAHADUR AND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this revision petition, the scope of Sections 31, 32 and 33 of the Mysore Stamp Act, 1957, comes up for consideration.

(2.) The first respondent produced into the Court, an award with a prayer that the same may be made into a decree of the Court. The petitioner contended that the award in question was not duly stamped and therefore It is inadmissible In evidence. At one stage, the arguments centered round the question whether in the matter of stamping an award, the total value of the estate which is the subject matter of the award should be taken into consideration or whether the relief granted should be taken into consideration. The Court expressed its opinion that the total value of the estate should be the criteria. But it did not dispose of the question whether the award had been duly stamped as the respondents' learned Counsel wanted to cite authorities in support of his contention that the award is duly stamped. At a later stage, It was urged on behalf of the respondents that in view of the Certificate granted by the Collector under Section 32(3) of the Stamp Act, the Court cannot go into the question whether the award had been duly stamped or not. In support of that contention, the decision of the Madras High Court in Murugayya Pillai v. Rajagopal Pillai, AIR 1942 Mad 381 was cited before the Court below. The Court below following that decision held that the award had been duly stamped.

(3.) In this Court, the learned Counsel for the petitioner has assailed the order of the Court below on two grounds, viz., (i) that the Court below had no jurisdiction to review its earlier order as no review application had been filed within the period of limitation; and (ii) the view of the Court below that it is bound by the certificate issued by the Collector cannot be supported on a true interpretation of Section 32.