Promissory note execution and stamping can be complete on final stamping and delivery, not only at signature.

A promissory note may be treated as duly executed where the maker signed it, the instrument was later completed by affixing additional stamps, and delivery followed. The Stamp Act requirement that a chargeable instrument be stamped before or at the time of execution was read pragmatically: execution was not confined to the moment of signature alone, and the note became complete only on final stamping and delivery. The Court also applied the principle that a negotiable instrument is completed by delivery, actual or constructive, under the Negotiable Instruments Act. On that basis, the challenge to the instrument failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the promissory note was duly executed when the stamps were affixed after the maker's signature, and whether such stamping satisfied the requirement that the instrument be stamped at the time of execution.

Analysis: The relevant provisions of the Indian Stamp Act define execution as signature and require chargeable instruments to be stamped before or at the time of execution. The Court rejected the narrow view that the signature must invariably follow the affixing of stamps. It held that the phrase "at the time of execution" must be understood reasonably, and that where the document was signed, passed on, additional stamps were affixed, and the document was then completed and delivered, execution was complete only on final stamping and delivery. The Court also relied on the rule that a negotiable instrument is completed by delivery, actual or constructive, under the Negotiable Instruments Act.

Conclusion: The promissory note was held to be duly executed and the appellant's challenge failed.

---