Instruments not duly stamped inadmissible in evidence, etc
Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 deals with instruments not duly stamped inadmissible in evidence, etc. No instrument chargeable with duty shall be admitted in evidence for any purpose by any person having by law or consent of parties authority to receive evidence, or shall be acted upon, registered or authenticated by any such person or by any public officer, unless such instrument is duly stamped : The Act came into force on 01 Jul 1899.
No instrument chargeable with duty shall be admitted in evidence for any purpose by any person having by law or consent of parties authority to receive evidence, or shall be acted upon, registered or authenticated by any such person or by any public officer, unless such instrument is duly stamped :
Provided that--
(a) any such instrument 1[shall] be admitted in evidence on payment of the duty with which the same is chargeable, or, in the case of any instrument insufficiently stamped, of the amount required to make up such duty, together with a penalty of five rupees, or, when ten times the amount of the proper duty or deficient portion thereof exceeds five rupees, of a sum equal to ten times such duty or portion;
(b) where any person from whom a stamped receipt could have been demanded, has given an unstamped receipt and such receipt, if stamped, would be admissible in evidence against him, then such receipt shall be admitted in evidence against him on payment of a penalty of one rupee by the person tendering it;
(c) where a contract or agreement of any kind is effected by correspondence consisting of two or more letters and any one of the letters bears the proper stamp, the contract or agreement shall be deemed to be duly stamped;
(d) nothing herein contained shall prevent the admission of any instrument in evidence in any proceeding in a Criminal Court, other than a proceeding under Chapter XII or Chapter XXXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 (V of 1898);
(e) nothing herein contained shall prevent the admission of any instrument in any Court when such instrument has been executed by or on behalf of the Government, or where it bears the certificate of the Collector as provided by section 32 or any other provision of this Act. STATE AMENDMENT
Uttar Pradesh
Amendment of section 35.--In section 35 of the principal Act, in the proviso in clause (d), for the words and figures Chapter XII or Chapter XXXVI of the Code of criminal Procedure, 1898, the words and figures sections 125 to 128 and sections 145 to 148 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 shall be substituted.
[Vide Uttar Pradesh Act 6 of 1980, s. 7]
Amendment of section 35. In section 35 of the principal Act, in clause (a) of the proviso for the words five rupees. or, when ten times the amount of the proper duty of deficient portion thereof exceeds five rupees, of a sum equal to ten times such duty or portion: the following words shall be substituted, namely :--
a sum equal to ten times the amount of the proper duty or deficient portion thereof ;
[Vide Uttar Pradesh Act 22 of 1998, s. 3]
Section 35, The Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (Act 2 of 1899).
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
This section refers to
Referred to by 8
- s. 6 Instruments coming within several descriptions in Schedule I
- s. 38 Instruments impounded how dealt with
- s. 42 Endorsement of instruments on which duty has been paid under sections 35, 40 or 41
- s. 44 Persons paying duty or penalty may recover same in certain cases
- s. 45 Power to Revenue-authority to refund penalty or excess duty in certain cases
- s. 60 Statement of case by other Courts to High Court
- s. 61 Revision of certain decisions of Courts regarding the sufficiency of stamps
- s. 62 Penalty for executing, etc., instrument not duly stamped
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
SMS Tea Estates Pvt. Ltd. v. Chandmari Tea Co. Pvt. Ltd.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Judgment of Main Case order-9.pdf 2011-07-20. CA 5820/2011. DATE-CHECK flagged 2006 lease dates from the facts; the document is the SMS Tea reportable judgment. Stamp Act 33/35: an unstamped instrument cannot be acted upon; an arbitration clause in that instrument goes with it until duty and penalty are paid. Later Interplay (2023) 7-judge overruled the unstamped-arbitration holding; this remains the teaching file for s.35 until that PDF is indexed. Map stamp-act 33 and 35.
On this section: s.35: an instrument chargeable with duty is inadmissible unless duly stamped. An arbitration clause in that instrument cannot be acted on until duty and penalty are paid. Interplay (2023) later overruled the arbitration holding; this remains the s.35 teaching file until that PDF is indexed.
-
Avinash Kumar Chauhan vs Vijay Krishna Mishra
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The phrase 'for any purpose whatsoever' in Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act 1899 must be given its natural and full meaning, and applies with absolute force to bar admission of unstamped or insufficiently stamped instruments in evidence regardless of whether the purpose is primary (enforcement of contract) or collateral (proof of consideration payment or any other subsidiary fact). An instrument chargeable with stamp duty that has not been properly stamped cannot be admitted in evidence for any purpose unless the requirements of the provisos to Section 35 are satisfied by payment of proper duty and applicable penalties. The proviso to Section 49 of the Indian Registration Act 1908, which permits use of unregistered documents for collateral purposes, does not operate to override or diminish the absolute bar created by Section 35 of the Stamp Act. Where an agreement to sell is accompanied by transfer of possession before execution of formal conveyance, it becomes a conveyance by virtue of the legal fiction created in the Explanation to Article 23 of Schedule IA, and is therefore subject to stamp duty applicable to conveyances rather than agreements to sell.
On this section: Central provision interpreting that unstamped instruments are absolutely inadmissible for ANY purpose whatsoever unless requirements of provisos are met, including payment of duty and penalty
-
Trustees of H. C. Dhanda Trust Trustee, Jogesh vs The State of Madhya Pradesh Collector Indore
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a discretion is vested by statute in a public authority to impose penalty not exceeding ten times the proper duty or deficient portion thereof under Section 40(1)(b) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, such discretion must be exercised reasonably and not in an oppressive manner. The imposition of extreme penalty of ten times is not automatic or mechanical but requires consideration of relevant factors including the conduct of the party, intent, fraud, deceit, and circumstances of the case. Mere intention to evade duty is insufficient to justify the maximum penalty; it is only in very extreme situations that the maximum penalty should be imposed. The purpose of penalty is deterrence and not retribution.
On this section: Instruments not duly stamped inadmissible in evidence; provides for penalty of five rupees or ten times the duty, whichever is higher
-
Sevoke Properties Pvt. LTD vs West Bengal State Eletrictiy Distribution Company Limited
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When an unregistered lease agreement for a term exceeding one year is expressly admitted by the tenant in its written statement to have been for a specific term that has expired, the lease determines by efflux of time under Section 111(a) of the Transfer of Property Act without requiring a formal notice under Section 106. The tenant's status upon expiration of the admitted term becomes that of tenant at sufferance, and the filing of an eviction suit itself constitutes sufficient notice to quit. Therefore, no separate notice under Section 106 is mandatory for maintaining an eviction suit in such circumstances.
On this section: Relates to stamping requirements for documents. Unregistered and unstamped documents are inadmissible in evidence.
-
Hariom Agrawal vs Prakash Chand Malviya
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
A photocopy of an original document which is improperly stamped or insufficiently stamped cannot be admitted in evidence, either as primary evidence or as secondary evidence under Section 63 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The provisions of Sections 33, 35, 36, and 37 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 apply only to original instruments as defined in Section 2(14) and do not extend to copies thereof. The Collector's power under Section 48-B to recover stamp duty deficiency noticed from a copy of an instrument does not authorize the impounding of the copy for purposes of judicial admission of evidence. Therefore, when the original instrument is lost and only a photocopy is available, and the original was improperly or insufficiently stamped, the photocopy cannot be admitted as secondary evidence in any proceeding.
On this section: Instruments not duly stamped inadmissible in evidence - the Court held that this section bars admission of unstamped or insufficiently stamped original instruments, and by extension, bars secondary evidence of such instruments
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Judgments citing this section
These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.
-
… We consider it appropriate to refer the following issue, to be authoritatively settled by a Constitution bench of five judges of this Court : " Whether the statutory bar contained in Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 applicable to instruments chargeable to Stamp Duty under Section 3 read with the Schedule to the Act, would also render the arbitration agreement contained in such an instrument, which is not chargeable to payment of stamp duty, as being non-existent, unenforceable, or invalid, pending …
-
… The period of limitation, it has been contended in respect of the partition decree, cannot begin to run till it is engrossed on requisite stamp paper. There is thus, it has been contended, a legislative bar under Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act for enforceability of partition decree. Mr Mani contended that enforcement includes the whole process of getting an award as well as execution since execution otherwise means due performance of all formalities, necessary to give validity to a document. We are, however, unable to record our …
-
… The period of limitation, it has been contended in respect of the partition decree, cannot begin to run till it is engrossed on requisite stamp paper. There is thus, it has been contended, a legislative bar under Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act for enforceability of partition decree. Mr Mani contended that enforcement includes the whole process of getting an award as well as execution since execution otherwise means due performance of all formalities, necessary to give validity to a document. We are, however, unable to record our …
Made under this section, and citing it
1 instrument names this provision in its title or its text without being made under it.
Questions about Section 35
What have the courts held on Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act?
SMS Tea Estates Pvt. Ltd. v. Chandmari Tea Co. Pvt. Ltd. (20 Jul 2011) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: s.35: an instrument chargeable with duty is inadmissible unless duly stamped. An arbitration clause in that instrument cannot be acted on until duty and penalty are paid. Interplay (2023) later overruled the arbitration holding; this remains the s.35 teaching file until that PDF is indexed. Another 4 judgments on this section are set out below, all of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2007 to 2020.
How do I find court cases under Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: Stamp Act 35, section 35 Stamp Act, section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act. People searching for it also type indian stamp act article 35 and indian stamp act 1899 article 35 schedule 1b. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 5 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with SMS Tea Estates Pvt. Ltd. v. Chandmari Tea Co. Pvt. Ltd. (20 Jul 2011).
What should I read with Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act, and has it changed?
Its own text turns on section 32 (Certificate by Collector), so none of them can safely be read on its own. 8 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it. One instrument names it without being made under it, most recently The Indian Stamp Rules 1925 (as in force of Tamil Nadu) (1964).
When did Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act come into force?
Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act, cited as Stamp Act 35, came into force on 01 Jul 1899, having been enacted on 27 Jan 1899. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 47. Power of payer to stamp bills, and promissory notes received by him unstamped4923 words
- 2. Definitions3110 words
- 3. Instruments chargeable with duty1916 words
- 10. Duties how to be paid1187 words
- 28. Direction as to duty in case of certain conveyances961 words
- 73. Books, etc., to be open to inspection932 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 15 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.