Odris vs Piries – clr volume 3 page 014_1

The case between ODRIS (plaintiff) and PIRIES (defendant) addressed the issue of whether an unstamped I.O.U., relied upon as evidence of an account stated, is admissible under the Stamp Ordinance No. 3 of 1890 and whether such a document falls within the definition of a stamped acknowledgment of debt. The court held that the I.O.U., despite its lack of stamp duty and formal deficiencies, was valid as evidence supporting the plaintiff’s claim. It was determined that the instrument did not constitute an acknowledgment of a debt as stipulated in Schedule B, Part I of the Stamp Ordinance, reaffirming the principle that technical defects related to stamping do not automatically preclude admissibility where the statutory definition is not satisfied. The decision relied on the relevant statutory