LexStreak
Read free →
Madras High Court· 11 September 2026

Is a ten rupee stamp paper sufficient for an agreement under Article 5(j) of Schedule I to the Indian Stamp Act?

ARUMUGAM v. BHUVANESWARI
SA.1441/2007 · 2026:MHC:3766 · S.A.NO.1441 OF 2007
Coram: Justice R.Sakthivel
🔖 Save this judgment🔔 Follow Sch.I Art.5(j) Indian Stamp Act,…📬 Get today's judgments
View the original judgment PDFFree to read. To download it — or the LexStreak typeset copy with the headnote and Points of Law — create an account; downloads are part of the Pro plan.
Answer

A ten rupee stamp paper is sufficient for an agreement under Article 5(j) of Schedule I to the Indian Stamp Act.

Yes. A ten rupee stamp paper is sufficient for an agreement under Article 5(j) of Schedule I to the Indian Stamp Act, as amended by the Tamil Nadu State Amendment. Both the previous Courts were therefore not right in holding the panchayat partition agreement inadmissible as unstamped and unregistered. (¶30)

Headnote

Indian Stamp Act, 1899 — Sch.I Art.5(j) — Specific Relief Act, 1963 — Panchayat partition agreement — Family arrangement — Registration — Admissibility — Family arrangement — Semblance of a claim — Entitlement to enter into a partition — Held: A member holding a semblance of a claim is entitled to enter into a family arrangement, and a pre-existing title is not a condition of doing so. (¶28) Registration — Agreement contemplating a further registered instrument — Registration not required — Held further: An agreement that records a panchayat partition and contemplates a further registered instrument is not a partition deed and need not be registered. (¶30) Indian Stamp Act, 1899 — Sch.I Art.5(j) — Stamp on an agreement — Ten rupee stamp paper sufficient — Held further: Such an agreement written on a ten rupee stamp paper is sufficiently stamped, and the concurrent finding of inadmissibility cannot stand. (¶30) Specific Relief Act, 1963 — Enforcement of a panchayat partition agreement — Suit for specific performance — Held further: The remedy is a suit for specific performance of a registered partition deed, not a suit for declaration or for partition. Second appeal allowed in part. (¶32, 33)

Headnote

You've used your free headnotes this month

The answer above and the Court's own paragraphs stay free. LexStreak's full headnote on this judgment needs an account — a free one opens it again.

Create my free account
In the Court's own words
Paragraph 30Moving on to the aspect of admissibility of Ex-A.1, the nomenclature itself viz., Panchayat Partition Agreement (“gv{;rhaj;J ghf cld;gof;if’’)shows that it is an agreement to respect the panchayat partition in respect of the suit properties, whereby it was also agreed to reduce the terms of the said panchayat partition into a legal document and register the same in future; it is not a Partition Deed. The terms contained in Ex-A.1 clearly establish the same. An agreement which merely contemplates a further registered instrument need not necessarily be registered. Further, Ex-A.1 is written on a Rs.10/- Stamp Paper which is sufficient for an agreement on that date as per Schedule I, Art.5(j) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 as Amended by TamilNadu State Amendment. Hence, both the previous Courts are not right in holding that Ex-A.1 is an inadmissible document, since it is unstamped and unregistered. The common Substantial Question of Law framed in these Second Appeals is answered accordingly.
Acts & Sections
Sch.I Art.5(j) Indian Stamp Act, 1899Specific Relief Act, 1963s.14 Limitation Act, 1963

One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.

Read the full text of ARUMUGAM v. BHUVANESWARI — and get the Madras High Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.

Create my free account

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India

Open the full judgment →

Also decided in this judgment
Is a semblance of a claim sufficient for a family member to enter into a family arrangement?Does an agreement which merely contemplates a further registered instrument require registration?Is the remedy to enforce a panchayat partition agreement a suit for specific performance and not a suit for partition?
Plain-language answer prepared by the LexStreak Editorial Desk — verify against the judgment. Source: Madras High Court. Corrections