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

2006 Supreme(Bom) 2098

V.R.KINGAONKAR
MAHARASHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD – Appellant
Versus
NIRANJAN ALLOYS STEELS PVT. LTD. , AURANGABAD – Respondent


JUDGMENT :- Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of the parties.

2. This petition involves question whether inherent powers available under section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code could be invoked by the trial Court for allowing extension of time to deposit deficit Court fees and restoration of suit when the plaint was rejected under Order VIT, Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code due to non-payment of the required Court fees.

3. A resume of few facts may be set out in order to gather the dimensions of the disputed questions. A Special Civil Suit was filed by the respondent for recovery of damages and compensation to the tune of Rs. 853.50 lacs against the petitioner-M.S.E.B. There was deficit Court fees when the plaint was filed. An application was filed for grant of one month's time to deposit the remaining Court fees. After lapse of one month, again extension of time was sought which was rejected by the trial Court. The respondent filed yet another application dated 9-8-2002 seeking one week's time by way of last chance to make up the deficit Court fees or alternatively to allow him to deposit a cheque of Rs. 3,00,000/-. The alternative prayer was gra




























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