Whether document would be admissible on basis of recital made in it or on basis of pleadings raised by parties?

Smt. Rashmi Pandit, learned Deputy Government Advocate for the State, however submitted that admissibility of the document would depend upon the recitals made in the document and not on basis of the pleadings made by one party and denied by the other.

Article 23 of Schedule-IA of the Indian Stamp Act refers to conveyance but with an added explanation it says that whenever there is an agreement to sell immovable property and there is a recital in the document that possession has been delivered to the proposed purchaser then the document would be deemed to be a conveyance and the stamp duty at the rate of 7.5% will have to be paid.

A document would be admissible on basis of the recitals made in the document and not on basis of the pleadings raised by the parties.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH (INDORE BENCH)

W.P. No. 6464/2008

Decided On: 22.01.2010

 Mansingh  Vs. Rameshwar

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

R.S. Garg and Prakash Shrivastava, JJ.

Print Page

Supreme Court: Stamping Not Necessary For Enforcement Of Foreign Arbitral Awards In India

 On the other hand, the Madhya Pradesh High Court judgment (supra)
hits nearer home. This judgment, in paragraph 12 thereof, states why foreign
awards do not have to suffer stamp duty in the following terms:
“12. The Law on Arbitration in India was substantially contained
in three enactments namely, The Arbitration Act, 1940, The

Arbitration (Protocol and Convention) Act, 1937 and The
Foreign Awards (Recognition and Enforcement) Act, 1961. It
was widely felt the 1940 Act, which contains the General Law of
Arbitration, has become outdated. The Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996 came in force to consolidate and amend
the Law relating to Domestic Arbitrations, International
Commercial Arbitration, enforcement of foreign arbitral awards
and to define the law relating to conciliation, commission on
international trade in short (UNCITRAL) Model Law and Rules.
Apart from other object, the object of the Act is to provide that
every final arbitral award is enforced in the same manner as if it
were a decree of the Court. While Arbitration and Conciliation
Act, 1996 was enforced, no amendment was made in the
definition of award given in the Indian Stamp Act. Similarly, the
Schedule which lays down the stamp duty payable on award
was not amended by including the foreign award. It appears
that law makers while enforcing the Arbitration and Conciliation
Act, 1996 was of the view that foreign award shall be
enforceable as if it were a decree of the Court, no amendment
was brought either in the definition of award or in the Schedule
relating to payment of stamp duty on award. Since the
definition of award given at Entry No. 11 of the Schedule of the
Indian Stamp Act does not cover the foreign award and one of
the objects to enforce the new Act was to enforce final award
as if it was a decree and keeping in view the law laid down by
the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Fuerst Day Lawson Ltd.
(supra), wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that
under the new Act the foreign award is already stamped as
decree, this Court is of the view that the petition filed by the
petitioner has no merits and deserves to be dismissed. In view
of this, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of holding
that foreign award is already stamped and is enforceable as
decree.”
We, therefore, hold that the learned Single Judge of the Madras High

Court is correct, and the fact that a foreign award has not borne stamp duty
under the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 would not render it unenforceable for the
reasons given in our judgment.
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9515 of 2018
(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) NO.13913 OF 2018)

M/S SHRIRAM EPC LIMITED Vs RIOGLASS SOLAR SA.

Dated:September 13, 2018.
R.F. NARIMAN, J.
Citation:AIR 2018 SC 4539

Print Page