Pankuwarbai wd/o Dalpatrao Mutha and other vs Rameshchandra s/o Dalpatrao Mutha and others

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

1997 Supreme(Bom) 447

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
(AURANGABAD BENCH)
B.B. Vagyani, J.
Pankuwarbai wd/o Dalpatrao Mutha others ..... Petitioners.
Versus
Rameshchandra s/o Dalpatrao Mutha others .... Respondents.
Civil Revision Application No. 477 of 1997, decided on 27-8-1997.
Advocates appeared :
R.M. Borde, for petitioners.
Chaudhary, for respondents.

Headnote:Section 46-Notification dated 1.10.1994 issued under Section 46 of Bombay Court Fees Act-Application of notification issued by Government of Maharashtra granting exemption of court-fees for women litigants-Petitioners approached trial Judge claiming benefit of exemption in the matter of payment of court-fees-Trial Judge rejected the application on the ground that there is no dispute of property-Order challenged-Government of Maharashtra issued notification dated 1.10.1994 for remission of fees payable by woman litigants-Interpretation by Civil Judge too narrow and too technical-Held, petitioners are clearly entitled to get remission of court-fees-Order passed by Civil Judge set aside-Court directed Civil Judge to proceed with the matter-Without insisting for court-fees.
Schedule I, Article 11, Section 46-Indian Succession Act, 1925, Section 372-Court fees-Remission of As the remission of fees payable by woman litigants in respect of succession certificate by state, is contemplated by Article 11 of Schedule first.- The Government of Maharashtra has decided to extend certain benefits to the woman litigants in the matter of exemption of court fees. The intention behind extending the benefits in the matter of payment of court fees appears to be sacrosanct. No woman litigant suffered by poverty should be deprived of her legitimate right in relation to the property. Therefore, the Government has decided to confer the very valuable right on the woman litigants. By virtue of the Government of Maharashtra Notification dated 1.10.1994 the woman litigants are allowed to initiate appropriate action in the Civil Court or Criminal Court in respect of cases relating to (a) maintenance (b) property dispute (c) violence and (d) divorce without paying court fees.
Section 372-Bombay Court Fee; Act, 1959, Section 46, Art. 11Remission of Court fee--While granting succession certificate, the spirit behind the notification is important it should not be defeated, petitioners are vividly entitled to get remission of Court fee.-It appears that the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Aurangabad, has interpreted property dispute as a dispute pertaining to the immovable property. This interpretation is too narrow and too technical. The petitioners, in this particular case, are claiming right in respect of the property left by deceased G. In the present case, the petitioners claimed right in the property left by deceased. In short the right claimed by the petitioners is certainly involved in the application for grant of Succession Certificate. In humble opinion, the spirit behind the notification issued by the Government of Maharashtra is required to be taken into consideration while granting remission of fees payable by woman litigants. This spirit cannot be defeated, declining to extent benefit of the notification in the matter of grant of Succession Certificate. The petitioners are clearly entitled to get remission of court-fees.

JUDGMENT - B.B. VAGYANI, J.:-Heard Shri R.M. Borde, learned Advocate for the petitioners and Shri Chaudhary for the respondents.

2.With the consent of the learned Counsel of the parties, the matter has been heard and finally disposed of.

3.Too technical approach not only mars the sacrosanct spirit but frustrates the very soul of the scheme, which has been declared and implemented by the Govern payment of Court fees.

4.The facts of this civil revision application lie within very narrow compass.

5.After sad demise of Ganeshchand Mutha, who happens to be the son of the petitioner No. 1 and other co-petitioners initiated Civil action for grant of Succession Certificate, in respect of the debts, securities, cash, shares, insurance policies, etc. left by late Ganeshchand Mutha.

6.The settlement was arrived at in between the respondent and petitioners Nos. 1 to 4. In response to the amicable settlement, the learned Trial Judge, allowed the application for grant of Succession Certificate and by his order dated 18-3-1197 directed to issue Succession Certificate in the names of petitioners Nos. 1 to 4, in respect of the debts, securities, shares, insurance policies, etc. left by the deceased Ganeshchand.

7.Relying on the Government Resolution dated l-10-1994 the petitioners moved the trial Court for exemption in the matter of payment of Court Fees. According to the petitioners, the petitioner Nos. 1 to 3 are women any by virtue of said Government Resolution dated 1-10-1994, the petitioners are entitled to get benefit of exemption in the matter of payment of Court Fees. The petitioners have enclosed copy of the gazette on record for the purpose of perusal of the learned trial Judge.

8.The learned Trial Judge is of the view that there is no dispute pertaining to the property and consequently, rejected the application of the petitioner in the matter of exemption of the Court Fees. This rejection order dated 21-3-1997 has been challenged in this civil revision application, filed by the petitioners.

9. The impugned order, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Aurangabad, is very cryptic and runs in three lines. The substance of the rejection order is that the dispute does not pertain to the property and the nature of the proceedings is off recession Certificate. The approach adopted by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Aurangabad, is too technical and at the same time, too narrow.

10.The Government of Maharashtra has decided to extend certain benefits to the

woman litigants in the matter of exemption of Court Fees. The intention behind extending the benefits in the matter of payment of Court Fees appears to be sacrosanct. No woman litigant suffered by poverty should be deprived of her legitimate right in relation to the property. Therefore, the Government has decided to confer the very valuable right on the woman litigants. By virtue of the Government of Maharashtra Notification dated 1-10-1994, the woman litigants are allowed to initiate appropriate action in the Civil Court or Criminal Court in respect of cases relating to (a) maintenance (b) property dispute (c)) violence and (d) divorce, without paying Court Fees.

11.While appreciating the issue involved one cannot forget that the Government of

Maharashtra has decided to promote the welfare of the woman litigants. The relevant extract of notification issued under section 46 of the Bombay Court Fees Act, reads as under:

"And whereas section 46 of the Bombay Court Fees Act, 1959 (Chapter XXXV of Act, 1959), the Government of Maharashtra hereby remits the fees payable fay woman litigants on any of the plaints, applications, petitions, memorandum of appeals, or any other documents specified in the First and Second Schedules of the said Act to be filed in any Civil or Criminal Court in respect of cases relating to (a) maintenance (b) property disputes (c) violence and (d) divorce."

12.If the Notification is subjected to close scrutiny, it clearly indicates that the remission of fees pa

Click Here to Read the rest of this document