Act/Law wise: Judgment of Supreme Court of Bangladesh

ALL A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z



Stamp Act [II of 1899]
Section/Order/Article/Rule/Regulation Head Note
Sections 2(2), 18 & 35

Stamping instru­ments executed outside Bangladesh—When the SCC Judge examined the power of attorney ordered refiling on validation it will be deemed to have cured the defect of absence of Bangladesh stamps on the power of attorney and also the breach of time limit for stamp. The holder of the power of attorney must pay the prescribed penalty otherwise the power of attorney will be inadmissible in evidence. Anath Bandhu Guha & Sons Ltd vs Babu SS Halder 42 DLR (AD) 244. ....View Full Judgment

Section 2(17)

Definition of mortgage deed occurring in section 2(17) of Stamp Act, 1899. BHBFC vs A Mannan 41 DLR (AD) 143. ....View Full Judgment

Section 12

Cancellation of a stamp is a question of fact. Object of cancellation is to prevent its use over again.
Cancellation of the adhesive stamps should be in a manner that it cannot be used again. The adhesive stamps affixed in the impugned deed have writing on it ‘cancelled’ on each of the stamps. It is contended that it does not fulfill the requirement as indicated in section 13(3) of the Stamp Act.
The question arises as to whether the effective cancellation of the stamps contemplated in section 12 of the Stamp Act is a question of fact. The object of effectively canceling stamps is to make it unfit for further use in the ordinary course of business. The effectiveness of cancellation has to be determined by reference to the question whether if it be removed from the document it could be used again. This question must obviously be considered with reference to facts of each particular case.
The words “so that it cannot be used again’ occurring in sub-clause (l)(a) of section 12 of the Stamp Act means merely such cancellation as will prevent the stamp being lawfully or conscientiously used again.
Now that the document has been produced before the authority as an evidence of transfer and if the authority finds that the stamps do not show that these were used before and act upon it, the party gets the desired object. But if thereafter the stamp is stolen and used by any other person then it would only bring that person within the mischief of sub-clause (3) of section 12 the Stamp Act.
Jabed Ali Vs. Dr. Sultan Ahmed (1975) 27 DLR (SC) 78. ....View Full Judgment

Section 13

Cancellation of a stamp is a question of fact. Object of cancellation is to prevent its use over again.
Cancellation of the adhesive stamps should be in a manner that it cannot be used again. The adhesive stamps affixed in the impugned deed have a writing on it ‘cancelled’ on each of the stamp. It is contended that it does not fulfill the requirement as indicated in section 13(3) of the Stamp Act. Jabed Ali Vs. Dr. Sultan Ahmed (1975) 27 DLR (SC) 78. ....View Full Judgment

Section 18

The very act of revalidating or re-stamping the power of attorney is defendant upon reciprocal arrangement. [Para-6] Molay Behari Biswas Vs. Govt. of Bangladesh 5 BLT (AD)-109 ....View Full Judgment

Section 18

“Proper Officer”—Under sub-rule(2) of Rule 12 of the Stamp Rules read with section 18 of the Stamp Act, it is the dut of the “Proper Officer’ as defined in Rule 9 of the Stamp Rules to stamp the instrument in the manner as described by Rule II of the said Rules. “Proper Officer” within the meaning of Rule 9 are specified in the Appendix—A to the Rules. Messers Anath Bandhu Guha and Soits Ltd. through its attrorney Md. Sirqjul Huq Vs- Babu Sudhangshu She khar Halder, 11BDL(AD)66 ....View Full Judgment

Section 35 and Art. 45

In the instant case the final decree was passed on 30.11.54 but the decree was drawn and signed on 22.5.65. The decree could not be drawn and signed earlier as the required stamp- paper was not put in. A decree in a partition suit is an instrument of partition which is chargeable with stamp duty under Article 45 of the Stamp Act. 1899, and unless it is duly stamped the decree is not a4missible in evidence as provided in section 35 of the Stamp Act. AminullahBhuiyan Vs. Abdul Hafiz (1981)33 DLR (AD) 282. ....View Full Judgment

Section 35

A failure to comply with the stamp duty as provided under the Stamp Act may entail penalty but the instrument cannot be thrown away for want of stamp as inadmissible in evidence not being duly stamped. [Para-22] Abdul Karim & Ors. Vs. Md Serajuddin Ahmed & Ors 7 BLT (AD)-160. ....View Full Judgment

Art.40(b)

Respondent mortgaged his properties, as a security for obtaining loan to the Bangladesh Shilpa Rin Sangstha—But so far as the Bank of CC International is concerned it is a first security for which stamp-duty under clause (b) of the Act is chargeable. Chairman National Board of Revenue Vs. GMG Corpn. (1983) 35 DLR (AD) 263. ....View Full Judgment

Art. 40 (c)

Mortgage-deed is a security in addition to the securities already furnished, in favour of the same lender and in respect of the same loan. Chairman, National Board of Revenue, Bangladesh Vs. M/s. GMG Corporation Ltd. (1983) 35 DLR (AD) 262. ....View Full Judgment

Article 45

—In the instant case the final decree was passed on 30.11.54 but the decree was drawn and signed on 22.5.65. The decree could not be drawn and signed earlier as the required stamp paper was not put in. A decree in a partition Suit 1S an instrument of partition which is chargeable with stamp duty under Article 45 of the Stamp Act, 1898, and unless it is duly stamped the decree is not admissible if evidence as provided in section 35 of the Stamp Act. Aminullah Bhuiyan Vs Abdul Hajiz (1981) 33 DLR (AD) 282. ....View Full Judgment