ORDER

1. In this case the question is whether the petitioner/claimant is entitled to pay the deficit court fee after the appeals are allowed by condoning the delay in payment thereof. The High Court refused to condone the delay and following the earlier order, dismissed the appeal. On similar situation, number of matters have been filed before this Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner in fairness has brought to our notice a recent order of this Court in Chand Kaur v. Union of India{(1994) 4 SCC 663}. Therein their Lordships of the two-Judge Bench were pleased to follow the decision reported in Bhag Singh v. Union Territory of Chandigarh{(1985) 3 SCC 737} and allowed the appeals, condoned the delay and directed to compute the benefit of enhanced compensation and statutory benefits. Earlier a three-Judge Bench of this Court has considered that whether the High Court would be justified in refusing to condone the delay and permitting to pay the deficit court fee in S. C. Cooperative Land Owning Society Ltd. v. Union of India{(1991) 1 SCC 174} and held that the refusal to condone the delay and not directing to pay the court fee was justified and this Court did not interfere with the