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

1997 Supreme(SC) 1448

G. T. NANAVATI, J. S. VERMA, B. N. KIRPAL
Kashi Ram Namdeo Zambro – Appellant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra – Respondent


ORDER

1. The submission of learned counsel for the applicant-State of Maharashtra is that the judgment dated 31-10-1995 of this Court in Kashi Ram Namdeo Zambro v. State of Maharashtra ((1996) 1 SCC 289) is being misunderstood by the courts to mean that the same overrides the effect of Article 15 of Schedule I of the Bombay Court Fees Act, 1959 and, therefore, to this extent the said judgment requires clarification. It does appear to us that there is a likelihood of the said judgment being so misconstrued, even though it was not intended to say therein that the effect of Article 15 of Schedule I of the Bombay Court Fees Act, 1959 is overruled.

2. Accordingly, it is clarified hereby that the abovesaid judgment in Civil Appeal No. 3604 of 1982 shall not be construed to mean that it overrides the effect of Article 15 of Schedule I of the Bombay Court Fees Act, 1959 in cases where that provision applies. We may add that there is no reference to this provision in the said judgment and, therefore, there is no occasion to misconstrue that judgment.

3. IA is disposed of accordingly.

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