Stamp duty classification of security instruments turns on the Stamp Act definition of mortgage and the treatment of money as property.

For stamp duty purposes, the discussion turns on whether instruments securing specified sums are mortgage deeds or merely agreements. The Stamp Act definition of mortgage was treated as broader than the Transfer of Property Act and capable of extending to specified property beyond immovable assets. On that reasoning, the instruments could fall within mortgage deeds for stamp purposes; however, the Court ultimately held that money was not moveable property in this context and that the instruments were not mortgage deeds. The reference was answered against the revenue, and no additional stamp duty was held payable as mortgage deeds.

---

---

Issues: Whether the instruments filed in the suit were mortgage deeds chargeable to stamp duty as mortgage deeds, or mere agreements properly stamped.

Analysis: The instruments were found to secure specific sums and, on their terms, created rights over property within the wide definition of mortgage in the Stamp Act. The definition under the Stamp Act was treated as broader than the definition under the Transfer of Property Act and capable of including moveable property, including cash or its equivalent, as specified property. On that basis, the documents fell within the category of mortgage deeds for stamp purposes. The Court nevertheless held, on the point referred, that money was not moveable property and that the instruments were not mortgage deeds.

Conclusion: The instruments were not mortgage deeds chargeable as such, and the stamp duty paid was sufficient.

Final Conclusion: The reference was answered against the revenue contention and the documents were held not liable to additional duty as mortgage deeds.

Ratio Decidendi: For stamp purposes, classification depends on the statutory definition in the Stamp Act, but the instruments in question did not amount to mortgage deeds on the Court's view of money as property.

---