SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1970 Supreme(SC) 174

J.C.SHAH, K.S.HEGDE, A.N.GROVER
Sahadu Gangaram Bhagade – Appellant
Versus
Special Deputy Collector, Ahmednagar – Respondent


Advocates:
B.D.SHARMA, P.H.G.L.Sanghi, S.V.Gupta

Judgement Key Points

Question 1? What is the correct court-fee (ad valorem vs fixed) payable on a memorandum of cross-objection filed in an appeal under Section 11 of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952? Question 2? What is the applicable Article of Schedule I or Schedule II of the Bombay Court-fees Act, 1959 for cross-objections challenging an arbitrator’s award under Section 8(1) of the Act? Question 3? Does Section 7(1) of the Bombay Court-fees Act, 1959 require the cross-objection to have the force of a decree to attract its provisions?

Key Points: - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!)

Question 1?

What is the correct court-fee (ad valorem vs fixed) payable on a memorandum of cross-objection filed in an appeal under Section 11 of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952?

Question 2?

What is the applicable Article of Schedule I or Schedule II of the Bombay Court-fees Act, 1959 for cross-objections challenging an arbitrator’s award under Section 8(1) of the Act?

Question 3?

Does Section 7(1) of the Bombay Court-fees Act, 1959 require the cross-objection to have the force of a decree to attract its provisions?


Judgment

HEGDE, J.: This appeal by special leave, appears to have been brought as a test case. It arises from one of the l16 cross-objections filed in an appeal brought by the Special Deputy Collector, Ahmednagar to the High Court of Maharashtra, under section 11 of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952 (Act 30 of 1952) (to be hereinafter referred to as the Act) against an award made by the arbitrator under S. 8 (1) of that Act. The controversy in this appeal is as to the relevant provision of the Bombay Court-fees Act, 1959 under which the court-fee is payable on the claim made in the memorandum of cross-objection. According to the appellant on the claim in question a fixed court-fee of Rs. 5 is payable under Art. 13 of Sch. II of the Bombay Court-fees Act, 1959 but according to the State ad valorem court-fee is payable on that claim in question either under Art. 1 or Art. 3 of Sch. I of that Act. The High Court has come to the conclusion that on the claim made by the appellant ad valorem court-fee is payable under Art. 3 of Sch. I of the Bombay Court-fees Act, 1959. The appellant challenges that conclusion.

2. Lands belonging to the appellant and severa
























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top