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

1969 Supreme(Guj) 68

V.R.SHAH
FAKIRCHAND MAKANDAS, FIRM – Appellant
Versus
JAGADGURU SHANKARACHARYA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: MAHESH C.BHATT, S.N.SHELAT, V.P.Shah

V. R. SHAH, J.

( 1 ) THIS revision application is filed by the original plaintiff against the order passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) at Surat in Special Civil Suit No. 39 of 1966 whereby the learned trial Judge held that the suit of the plaintiff fell under the provisions of sec. 7 (iv) (d) of the Bombay Court Fees Act 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and accordingly called upon the plaintiff to pay additional Court fees amounting to Rs. 810. 00. He directed the plaintiff to pay this amount on or before 5th September 1967. The plaintiff has come in revision contending that his suit was rightly valued by him for the purposes of Court fees as it fell under the provisions of sec. 6 (iv) (j) of the Act and that therefore no additional Court fees was legally due from him.

( 2 ) AT the hearing of this Civil Revision Application Mr. S. N. Shelat the learned Advocate appearing for the contesting opponents Nos. 1 2 and 4 contended that no revision application lies under sec. 115 of the Civil Procedure Code. His argument is that the decision about the sufficiency of Court fees or otherwise is a decision within the jurisdiction of the trial Court which deal with the













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