( 1 ) THIS revision application under Rule 4 (v) of chapter V of Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960 challenges the order of Taxing Officer of High Court Bench at Nagpur dated 22-8-2003 in First appeal Stamp No. 14634/2003 holding that the appellant has to pay court fee on memo of appeal filed by her under section 23 of Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987. The Taxing Officer has relied upon judgment of this court between M/s betle Stores vs. State of Maharashtra reported at 7997 Mh. LJ. 823 and has found that the court fee is payable either under Art. 3 of Bombay Court Fees Act treating the decision of Railway Claims Tribunal to be an award or under Article 1 of Bombay Court Fees Act, which prescribes ad-valorem court fees depending upon the valuation of the suit. He has recorded that in either case there is no difference in amount of court fee required to be paid on such memo of appeal.

( 2 ) THE appellant is First Appeal Stamp No. 14634/2003 and applicant in this civil revision application Shrimati Sumitradevi was travelling by Kushinagar express from Kalyan to Kanpur Central on 7-1-2002 when she met with accident at about 7 A. M. in which she lost both legs. Her c