High CourtsDivision Bench(1919) 02 CAL CK 0042

Amolia vs In Re: Ibrahim Ishak

Calcutta High Court · Decided on 4 February 1919 · Citation: (1919) ILR (Cal) 804

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sanderson, C.J · Woodroffe, J

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

3 paragraphs · 105 words

Sanderson, C.J.—In this case learned Counsel has conceded--and I think rightly--that the tenancy was a monthly tenancy and, consequently, it comes within Article 35, Clause (a), Sub-clause (1) of the first Schedule of the Indian Stamp Act: that is to say, "the lease purports to be for a term of less than one year" Therefore, the proper stamp-duty is the same duty as for a bond which is referred to in Article 15; and, inasmuch as the amount is above Rs. 50 and does not exceed is. 100, the proper stamp-duty is eight annas, as the learned Judge has decided.

Woodroffe, J.

2.

I agree.