Supreme Court: Expecting a Minor to Respond to a Public Court Notice is ‘Perverse’ || SC: Order 23 Rule 1 CPC Applies to S. 11 Arbitration Act, Barring Fresh Arbiration After Abandonment || SC: Later Sanction Requirement Won’t Invalidate Cognizance Taken When No Prior Bar Existed || SC: Documents Not Admitted by an Employee in an Enquiry Must be Proved Through Witnesses || Delhi HC: MHA Has Authority to Initiate Disciplinary Proceedings Against AGMUT IAS Officers || MP HC: Financial Hardship or Mere Allegations of Lawyer’s Negligence Cannot Excuse Delayed Appeal || Patna HC: Blanket Approach of Denying Public Employment to Individuals Named in an FIR is Unfair || Kerala HC: Repeated Possession of Even Small Quantities of Narcotic Drugs Can Invoke KAAPA || Calcutta HC: Employers May Deduct Penal Rent From Gratuity of Employees Refusing to Vacate Quarters || Calcutta High Court: ECI Not Singling Out Bengal, More Transfers in Other Poll-Bound States

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 :