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

1995 Supreme(Bom) 235

A.P.SHAH
Syndicate Bank and others – Appellant
Versus
S. S. Printers and others – Respondent


JUDGMENT - A.P. SHAH, J.:---The aforesaid three bank suits are placed before me in view of objection raised by the Prothonotary and Senior Master that the said suits embrace two or more distinct subjects having regard to the provisions of Section 18 of the Bombay Court Fees Act, 1959 ("Act", for short), each such subject is liable to be charged separately and since the ad valorem fee for each subject is much more than Rs. 15,000/-, which is the maximum amount of Court fees payable on the plaint under proviso to Schedule 1, Article 1 of the Act, the plaintiffs are liable to pay Court fee of Rs. 15,000/- on each subject separately.

2. Mr, Tulzapurkar, Ms. Rege and Mr. Patel, learned Advocates appearing for the plaintiffs, submitted that the objection raised by the Prothonotary and Senior Master is completely misconceived. According to the learned Advocates, the suits as framed did not embrace two or more distinct subjects as ruled by the Prothonotary and Senior Master and that the provisions of section 18 were not attracted. It was pointed out that each of the said suit is based upon a single equitable mortgage and, therefore, even though monies have been advanced by the banks under













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