1969 (7) TMI 123

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Kanhaiya Lal Dulichand of Manohar Thana conveys his greetings to Kanhaiya Lal Dulichand of Manohar Thana. We have deposited the sum of ₹ 3 000/- for this Hundi with Kanahaiyalal Shrichand of Manohar Thana. Please pay to a Shah in accordance with the custom with regard to Shah Jog Hundis on Asad Badi 13/S. 2014. Sd/- Dulichand 7-5-67 This Hundi was thus payable after a stated period. It was only payable to a Shah. 3. The above Hundi is not a bill of exchange as defined under Section 5 of the Negotiable Instruments Act as it does not contain an unconditional order directing payment of money to a specified person or to the bearer of the instrument see Mangal Sen v. Ganeshi Lal AIR 1936 All. 396. 4. By the local usage such a Hundi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ondition or contingency which may or may not be performed or happen ; (b) an order for the payment of any sum of money weekly, monthly, or at any other stated periods; and (c) a letter of credit, that is to say, any; instrument by which one person authorizes another to give credit to the person in whose favour it is drawn. Bills of exchange payable on demand are exempt from stamp duty and on account of public policy the Legislature thought it fit to exempt the above classes of documents by enacting the fiction that they will be treated to be bills of exchange payable on demand although they are not actually so payable. 8. The Hundi in suit is an order for the payment of a sum of money at a stated period. Under Section 2(3)(b) of the S....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e exempt from the payment of any duty. 11. In an earlier case Tikamchand v. Laxmi Chand 1961 RLW 251 it was held that Shah Jog Hundi payable after specified date is payable on demand. The reasoning adopted in that decision is however not correct as was pointed out in Hanuman v. Fattu 1967 RLW 466. 12. In Tikamchand's case the decision in Partab Chand Ratan Ghand v. Gilbert AIR 1934 All. 695 (1) was followed. That decision related to a post-dated cheque and was not applicable to a Hundi. A post-dated cheque is not expressed to be payable otherwise than on demand and is therefore a cheque as defined in Section 6 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. By virtue of Section 19 of the Negotiable Instruments Act a cheque is always treated as bei....