2010 (11) TMI 1114 - HC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues involved: Determination of the nature of a document sought to be marked in evidence by the petitioner in a civil suit for recovery of debt.

Nature of Document - Promissory Note or Receipt:
The plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of debt based on a document described as a 'receipt,' while the defendant alleged it to be a forgery and not a receipt. The defendant objected to the document being a promissory note, which was upheld by the lower court based on the Indian Stamp Act. The parties referred to various High Court judgments in support of their arguments.

Definition of Promissory Note:
The Act defines a promissory note as containing an unconditional undertaking to pay a certain sum of money to a specific person or bearer. The document in question must satisfy conditions like being in writing, signed by the maker, and specifying payment details. Case laws from different High Courts were cited to determine the negotiability and essential elements of a promissory note.

Analysis of Document:
The document acknowledged the receipt of money and contained an undertaking to repay within a specified time. The court analyzed whether the document met the criteria of a promissory note, emphasizing negotiability and certainty of payment. The absence of a clear indication of payment to a specific person raised doubts on the document's classification as a promissory note.

Receipt vs. Promissory Note:
The court examined whether the document could be classified as a 'receipt' under the Act, considering the acknowledgment of money receipt and the repayment undertaking. It was concluded that the document, while acknowledging receipt, also contained an obligation to repay, falling within the definition of a 'receipt' and not a promissory note. The lower court's decision was overturned, directing the document to be impounded as a receipt.

Conclusion:
The Civil Revision Petition was allowed, determining the document as a 'receipt' under the Act and not a promissory note. The court directed the lower court to refer the document to the competent authority for impoundment.