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

1979 Supreme(SC) 467

O.CHHINNAPPA REDDY, R.S.SARKARIA
State Of U. P. – Appellant
Versus
Pt. Chandra Bhushan Misra – Respondent


Advocates:
G.N.DIKSHIT, O.P.RANA

JUDGMENT

CHINNAPPA REDDY, J.:— A second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 was allowed by the Allahabad High Court and the matter was remanded to the Lower Appellate Court for fresh disposal in accordance with law. The order of remand was made under the provisions of Order XLI, Rule 23 of the Civil Procedure Code 1908, as amended by the Allahabad High Court. The successful appellant before the High Court filed an application under Section 13 of the Court Fees Act, 1870 claiming a refund of the Court fee paid in the Second Appeal. The application came before G.C. Mathur, J., who entertained a doubt whether Section 13 of the Court Fees Act applied to a case of remand under the provisions of Order XLI Rule 23, Civil Procedure Code as amended by the High Court and referred the question for the consideration of a Full Bench. Thereafter the application was heard by the Full Bench* consisting of Jagdish Sahai, Pathak and Kirty, JJ. Pathak and Kirty JJ. took the view that refund of Court-fee could be ordered under Section 13 of the Court Fees Act, even where the remand was made under the amended provisions of Order XLI Rule 23. Jagdish Sahai, J. dissented. In acco










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