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

1958 Supreme(AP) 199

MOHAMMED AHMED ANSARI, P.CHANDRA REDDY
In Re: Dandamudi Sarojini Devi – Appellant
Versus
. – Respondent


( 1 ) IN this application, filed under Section 151, C. P. C. the petitioner prays for the issue of the necessary certificate for refund of the court-fee paid in S. R. No. 18129 of 1956.

( 2 ) THE counsel for the petitioner has argued before me that the first appeal filed by him was not numbered or heard by this Court, that the memorandum of appeal has been stamped with the court-fee, that the court-fee stamps have been defaced by the High Court office in the usual course of routine and that his purpose in filing this petition is to get a certificate so that he can approach the Government with that certificate for refund of the money which he had invested on the stamps less deduction at the rate of one anna in the rupee. For this he relies upon the decision in Nagaratnam, In re, 1950-1 Mad LJ 222 : (AIR 1950 Mad 629), where Panchapakesa Aiyar, J. , has pointed out that there could possibly be no objection by courts to grant such certificates.

( 3 ) THE Government Pleader opposes the application on the ground that the adoption of the same procedure adopted by Panchapakesa Iyer J. in that decision tantamount in effect to the refund of the court-fee and that such a course is not possib





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