S.B.SHUKRE
Arti wd/o. Deepak Kamlakar – Appellant
Versus
Vijay s/o. Deorao Kamlakar – Respondent
1. Heard.
2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
3. Heard finally by consent.
4. The petition has been filed to claim exemption from the payment of Court fees by relying upon the relief given by the State of Maharashtra in its notification, bearing No. STP 1094/CR859/ M1, dated 1st October, 1994. This notification prescribes that the Government shall remit the fees payable by women litigants on any of the motions such as plaint, application, petition, memorandum of appeal and so on and such remission is also permissible on the documents specified in Ist and IInd Schedule to the Bombay Court Fees Act, 1959, which are to be filed in any Civil, Family or Criminal Courts in respect of four categories of cases, namely, (i) maintenance, (ii) property disputes, (iii) violations & (iv) divorce.
5. It seems that the Government gave a rethink to one particular category of cases termed as “property disputes”. Although the reasons for revisiting this expression have not been brought on record, the fact remains that by a later notification bearing No.530/2000/673/CR199/ M1, issued on 23rd March, 2000, Government clarified the expression by laying down that by the expression “property di
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.