Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a consent decree expressly providing for transfer of immovable property falls within the definitions of "conveyance" and/or "instrument" under the Bombay Stamps Act, 1958, and is liable to stamp duty.
Analysis: The decree recited that the parties agreed that it would operate as a conveyance and that title in the suit property stood transferred from the defendants to the plaintiffs. The Court held that the decisive factor is the true effect of the document, not its label. A document by which property is inter vivos transferred answers the wide definitions of "conveyance" and "instrument". The 1985 amendment was treated as an abundant caution measure and not as showing that such decrees were previously outside the charging provisions. The earlier authority concerning a consent decree creating a charge was distinguished because it did not involve a decree operating as a transfer of title.
Conclusion: The consent decree was held to be both a conveyance and an instrument, and therefore liable to stamp duty.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a consent decree itself effects transfer of immovable property and the terms of the decree show that title is conveyed inter vivos, it falls within the stamp law definitions of conveyance and instrument and is chargeable to stamp duty, regardless of the form or label of the document.