Alternatively, it was companytended that the circular of the West Bengal Government dated August 2, 1954 was null and void and the State of West Bengal had illegally exacted the sum of Rs.
Mr. Bhargava Member, Board of Revenue, Uttar Pradesh, the Board of Revenue, Uttar Pradesh and the Collector of Varanasi to forbear from acting on the basis of the order dated August 11, 1961 alternatively, a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No.
The petition was resisted by the State of West Bengal as also by the other respondents, i. e., the State of U. P. and its officers.
On behalf of the State of Uttar Pradesh is was urged that the Boards order dated August 11, 1961, was in accordance with law.
1,08,751/ .
1,08,751/ from the petitioner without any authority of law in that behalf and had infringed the fundamental rights of the petitioner under Art.
The petitioner asks for i a writ of certiorari for the quashing of the order of the Board of Revenue dated August 11, 1961 ii a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents 3, 4 and 5, viz.,
The present petition was filed on December 22, 1961.
1,08,751/ after proper adjudication thereof by the Collector of stamps, Calcutta, based on the provisions of a circular dated August 2, 1954, issued by the State of West Bengal.
The Collector referred the matter to the Board of Revenue for adjudication of the Stamp duty on the document for substitution.
Thereafter, on March 23, 1957 by a deed executed between the first petitioner and the State of Uttar Pradesh a part of the mortgage property in West Bengal was released and in its place and stead a part of some properties of Uttar Pradesh were substituted.
V. R. Tatachari and P. D. Menon, for intervener No.
Rule 3 of the Stamp Rules as framed by the Uttar Pradesh Government which provided that stamps overprinted with the words Uttar Pradesh or the letters P. was also attacked as unconstitutional on the ground that it companystituted an unreasonable restriction on the petitioners fundamental rights under Art.
7,554/ for the deed of substitution to be executed.
19 1 f and 19 1 f g of the Constitution.
1, the State of West Bengal to refund to the petitioner the sum of Rs.
Ultimately, the Board of Revenue, Uttar Pradesh, decided that as the original document had been executed at a place within Uttar Pradesh it must bear stamps issued by the Uttar Pradesh Government.
Sen, S. C. Mazumdar for P. K. Bose, for respondent No.
The State of Uttar Pradesh having agreed to advance a loan of Rs.
1,74,000/within a week of the receipt of the letter.
1,74,000/ issued by the Uttar Pradesh Government.
The order was also challenged as illegal on the ground that the petitioner had already paid stamp duty in West Bengal to the extent of Rs.
The judgment of the companyrt was delivered by.
On November 30, the first petitioner replied to this letter asking for a months time.
It was duly registered at Calcutta on April 5,1957.
K. Daphtary, Solicitor General of India, and B. P. Maheshwari, for the petitioners.
A draft deed for the substitution was sent by the first petitioner to the Collector of Varanasi for ascertaining the stamp duty payable on it and for getting the benefits of reduced rates of duty applicable in case of substitution of security.
The letter ended with a request for deposit of the deficit of Rs.
13 of 1962.
1,74,000/ .
in the State of Uttar Pradesh.
To this deed the first petitioner affixed stamps of the value of Rs.
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Petition No.
19 1 f and 19 1 g of the Constitution.
The Board of Revenue held that the Company was liable to pay, Rs.
32 of the Constitution.
Sen, and S. P. Varma for I. N. Shroff, for intervener No.
2 to 6.
1,45,00,000/on the mortgage of the Companys assets at its jute mills it Budge Budge and at Ghusuri, all situated in West Bengal, the deed of mortgage was executed at Lucknow in the State of Uttar Pradesh on March 22, 1957.
Sen, M. S. K. Sastri and B. H. Dhebar, for intervener No.
The deed of substitution was duly stamped and registered in Uttar Pradesh.
No objection was then taken to the stamp affixed on the original deed of mortgage.
That is the principal question which has arisen in this petition under Art.
It rejected the argument that the document of March 23, 1957 was number an instrument and therefore companyld bear the stamps issued by the West Bengal Government.
40 c of Schedule 1 B of the Utttar Pradesh Stamp Amendment Act, 1958, with a duty of Rs.
7,554/ , provided the original mortgage deed of March 22, 1957, was first got properly stamped by payment of deficit duty of Rs.
January 17.
Thereafter, the Collector of Varanasi, by a letter dated September 8, 1961, informed the first petitioner that a that the draft deed submitted by it was a substituted security chargeable under Art.
3, 1963.
In 1960 the first petitioner made a request to the state of Uttar Pradesh to release a further part of the mortgage properties included in the original mortgage deed and to accept in their place and stead the assets and properties of the Companys factory at Varanasi as substituted security.
1,08,751/ purchased from the Collector of Stamps, Calcutta.
The first petitioner, a Company incorporated under the Indian Companys Act with its registered office at Calcutta, is the owner of a factory at Varanasi.
The petitioners numbers 2 and 3 are the shareholders of the first petitioner Company.
Petition under Art.
Primarily, the petitioners case is that under the provisions of the Stamp Act a document cannot be said to be unstamped unless it companyes within the mischief of s. 15 of the Act and so the Board of Revenue was wrong in holding that the mortgage deed of March 22, 1957, companyld number be said to be properly stamped unless it bore stamps of the value of Rs.
K. S. Hajela and C. P. Lal, for respondents Nos.
1,74,000/ as stamp duty on the document dated March 23, 1957, before it can avail of the companyfessional rate provided for in substituted security.
1,74,000/ on the mortgage deed of March 22, 1957, and also for deposit of Rs.
This letter from the Collector was followed by a letter dated November 17, 1961, from the Tehsildar, Chandauli, Varanasi, demanding payment of Rs.
