validity of rubber stamp document
Paid against bounce cheque in cash 15 years ago. Didn't receive cheque from firm but received Rubber stamp document from the payment staff. Found notice few months back for this case. Now the firm owner is not willing to accept this document. Person who collected cash has expired. Firm owner says cash book have been drained in flood. Doesn't prove any thing from his side that he has not received cash. Can Rubber stamp document help us win the case in this circumstance. Many Thanks.
It has even been stated by the courts that such rubber-stamp notations must not necessarily be signed by the Principle. If an agent, who had proper indicated authority, had put the rubber stamp, the document will still stand as an admissible evidence. The payment staff who sent the rubber stamp document can definitely be deemed to be an authorized agent who is authorized to send such documents on behalf of the firm.
The burden lies on the firm to prove that they did not receive the cheque from you. In a case before the court, the parties raised the argument that the rubber stamp of was not affixed by him. The Court held that the concerned party must prove the validity of the rubber stamp with the help of other evidences. In this case the Court held that there was no evidence to prove that the stamp was placed by the concerned party therefore the stamp was no accepted. . The case even went to the High Court and the decision was confirmed on the similar reasoning. Therefore, a simple stamp will not be enough for you or the firm to decide the matter and it will be accepted only with the help of some other evidences.
A mere statement by the firm's owner that he did not receive the money from you will not be enough as he will have to show with the help of other evidences that the stamp is not valid. This does not mean that you will not have to worry about procuring the evidence for your case. You must procure evidence to support your claim that you had given the cheque to the firm so that even if the firm is not able to prove the validity of the stamp, your evidence will compel the Court to accept that you had paid the said amount to the firm and the Court may decide in your favor. As per your statement, it seems that procuring some proof will be difficult but it is advised that you must try your best to contact people or procure documents which show that you made the cheque in favor of the firm. You can try to procure your old passbook which may throw light over the amount transferred or contact people who were involved in the transaction or the business who can corroborate that the cheques was given to the firm.
Moreover, under the Limitations Act any such suit has to be filed within 3 years. As in your case it has been 22 years, the incident is barred by the Limitation Act, 1969. It has been seen that where on the face of it, the claim is barred by the period of limitation, the court is most likely to reject it under Section 3 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
1. T. Chandri and Ors. Vs.Kambrath Kanarakutty AIR1990Ker122; Interads Advertising P. Ltd. Vs. Bentrex and Co. and others (1981)ILR 2Delhi681; Jaisukhlal Deve Vs. M/s Shankar Theatres (Firm) Astravati and Others 1982JLJ199.
2. T. Chandri and Ors. Vs.Kambrath Kanarakutty AIR1990Ker122
3. Interads Advertising P. Ltd. Vs. Bentrex and Co. and others (1981)ILR 2Delhi681
4.Jaisukhlal Deve Vs. M/s Shankar Theatres (Firm) Astravati and Others 1982JLJ199.
5. Jamadar Singh v. Krushna Chandra Swain, AIR 2000 Pat 200 (202).
Book a phone consultation with a top-rated lawyer on Lawfarm.