| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2014 SLG 2172 2014 SLD 2172 2014 CLD 1378 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No.1428 of 2007, decision dated: 14-05-2014.
NASIR-UL-MULK, AMIR HANI MUSLIM AND IJAZ AHMED CHAUDHRY, JJ
Arshad Ali Ch., Advocate-on-Record/Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant. Muhammad Ilyas Sheikh, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondent.
Civil Appeal No.1428 of 2007, decision dated: 14-05-2014.
NASIR-UL-MULK, AMIR HANI MUSLIM AND IJAZ AHMED CHAUDHRY, JJ
Arshad Ali Ch., Advocate-on-Record/Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant. Muhammad Ilyas Sheikh, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondent.
Sheikh MUHAMMAD SHAKEEL
VS
Sheikh Hafiz MUHAMMAD ASLAM
Law:
Section:
(a) Negotiable Instruments Act (XXVI of 1881)-------S. 4---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 17(2)(a)---"Promissory note"--- Attestation of--- Not a legal requirement---Instrument which fulfilled all the conditions mentioned in S. 4 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 would be termed as a "promissory note"---Such an instrument was not required to be attested in terms of Art. 17(2)(a) of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984. (b) Negotiable Instruments Act (XXVI of 1881)--- ----S. 4---Stamp Act (II of 1899), Ss. 35 & 36---Promissory note---Insufficiently stamped---Neither invalid nor void---Admissibility in evidence of an insufficiently stamped promissory note--- Scope--- Insufficiently stamped Promissory Note was neither invalid nor a void instrument, but it was only subject to disabilities mentioned in S. 35 of the Stamp Act, 1881---Deficiently stamped pro note was not admissible in evidence nor it could be acted upon unless duly stamped---However in terms of S. 36 of Stamp Act, 1881 if a deficiently stamped instrument was once admitted in evidence and marked as an exhibit, it was not permissible for the Court of first instance, or in appeal or in revision to exclude such instrument from its consideration---Provisions of S. 36 of Stamp Act, 1881 were mandatory in nature and had overriding effect on S. 35 of the said Act imposing a complete bar to question the admissibility of a Promissory Note once it had been admitted and exhibited in evidence without any objection from the other side and included all such instruments which fell under proviso (a) to S.35 of the Stamp Act, 1881. Ch. Khalid Mehmood v. Ch. Said Muhammad PLD 2005 Lah. 732 ref. (c) Negotiable Instruments Act (XXVI of 1881)--- ----S. 4---Stamp Act (II of 1899), Ss. 35 & 36---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.VIII, R.1 & O. XIV, R. 1(5)---Promissory Note insufficiently stamped---Admissibility in evidence--- Scope--- Irrespective of the fact that the Promissory note produced by the plaintiff in evidence was insufficiently stamped, it was neither challenged by the defendant in his written statement nor an issue was framed in regard to it--- Insufficiently stamped promissory note was admitted in…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492