Supreme Court: Non-Signatory Can Be Bound By an Agreement if Involved in Performing the Contract || Supreme Court: 'Washed-Off Theory' Inapplicable in Assessing Employee Retention Suitability || SC Directs States/UTs to Grant Ex-Servicemen Quota to Cadets Disabled 40% or More in Training || Delhi High Court Quashed Cases over Allegations of Excess Lead Content in Maggi Noodles || Madras High Court: Advocates Cannot Hinder Police From Producing Arrested Lawyers Before a Court || Allahabad HC Awarded Rs. 4.75 Lakh Compensation Over Illegal Vehicle Confiscation in a Beef Case || Allahabad High Court: Strong Suspicion, Not Proof of Guilt, is Sufficient to Frame Charges || Delhi HC: Prior Sanction Not Required Where Cognizance Preceded 2018 PC Act Amendment || Bombay High Court: The Notion of a "Perfect Victim" in Rape Cases is a Myth || Allahabad High Court: Prior Agreement With Inquiry Report Doesn't Vitiate Disciplinary Proceedings

Chief Controlling Revenue Authority v. Costal Gujarat Power Ltd. and Ors. - (Supreme Court) (11 Aug 2015)

Number of transactions, not number of documents for stamp duty

MANU/SC/0851/2015

Civil

In a case where the mortgagor borrowed from 13 banks in one instrument, the agreement fell under Section 5 of the Gujarat Stamp Act, 1958, the Court held. Though there was one instrument chronicling the transactions, the borrower had entered into 13 distinct loan agreements.

Relevant : Section 5 Gujarat Stamp Act, 1958 Act The Member, Board of Revenue v. Arthur Paul Benthall MANU/SC/0002/1955

Tags : STAMP DUTY NUMBER OF TRANSACTIONS ONE INSTRUMENT

Share :