An affidavit annexed to a duly stamped GPA requires no separate stamp duty.

In brief

The question

Whether the affidavit annexed to the GPA was an independent instrument requiring separate stamp duty and impounding.

The court held

The Court answered the issues in the petitioner’s favour.

It also directed

The Court allowed the writ petition, and set aside the Trial Court’s order impounding Ex.P-3. All pending applications were closed.

01Facts

The petitioner, the plaintiff in O.S. No. 7818/2011, challenged the Trial Court’s order allowing defendant Nos. 5 and 8 to 12’s application under Sections 33 and 34 read with Article 5(e)(i) of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957.

p. 4

The Trial Court held that an affidavit dated 24 September 1999, marked as Ex.P-3 and annexed to a General Power of Attorney (GPA), was insufficiently stamped and liable to be impounded.

p. 4

The petitioner contended that the GPA, already stamped and marked as Ex.P-2, contained the relevant terms, including provision for delivery of possession. The contesting respondents argued that the affidavit set out delivery of possession and therefore also required stamping.

p. 5

02Issues

i.Whether the affidavit annexed to the GPA was an independent instrument requiring separate stamp duty and impounding.

pp. 4–6

ii.Whether requiring separate stamp duty on the affidavit would amount to charging stamp duty twice on the same transaction.

p. 8

03Law Applied

Sections 33 and 34 of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957 concern the examination and impounding of instruments that are not duly stamped; Article 5(e)(i) addresses stamp duty on agreements relating to possession of property.

p. 4, 7

The Court treated an annexure that is not an independent instrument as part of the principal document, requiring the documents to be read together. Where the principal document effecting the transaction has been stamped, stamp duty should not be levied again on an annexure concerning the same transaction.

pp. 6–8

Provisions in the judgment · 3 · Linked ones open on LawLens

KARNATAKA STAMP ACT, 1957 Section 33 Section 34 Section 5

04Reasoning

The Court found that Ex.P-3 was an annexure to, and not an independent instrument separate from, the GPA. The GPA, executed between the same parties, comprehensively addressed the property transaction and authorised the grantee to deal with the property, including executing sale deeds and delivering possession; Clause 3 expressly provided for delivery of possession to purchasers.

pp. 6–7

Since the GPA was registered and stamp duty had been paid on it, the affidavit had to be read with the GPA, rather than treated as a separate instrument attracting additional duty. Requiring further duty would impose stamp duty twice on the same transaction.

p. 8