R.K. DESHPANDE, J.

1. In the revision filed under Section 5(2) of the Maharashtra Court Fees Act, 1959 (“the Court Fees Act”) read with Rule 4(v) of Chapter V of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960, the order of the Taxing Officer and the Deputy Registrar, High Court, Bench at Nagpur, passed on 5-8-2016 in First Appeal Stamp No.6175 of 2016, is challenged. The Taxing Officer has held that the applicants have to pay the deficit court fees of Rs.12,405/- on the memo of appeal filed under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 (“the Claims Tribunal Act”).

2. Dr. (Smt.) Shalini Phansalkar Joshi, J., by her order dated 2-8-2017, noticed two conflicting views taken by the two Coordinate Benches of this Court and, therefore, referred the following legal issue for consideration by the Larger Bench :

“[i] In view of the two conflicting views taken by two Coordinate Benches of this Court, one in the case of Sumitradevi Mahipal Kureel vs. State of Maharashtra and others Mh.L.J. 2005(4) 133 and another in the case of Sisupalan K. Vallikalayil and another vs. Union of India 2016(4) Mh.L.J. 154, whether in an appeal under section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal