The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of S.87(2) of the new Act, the application of the doctrine of noscitur a sociis and ejusdem generis, and the reliance on precedent to determine the legislative intent and judicial interpretation of the provisions.

1. By virtue of S.119 of the States Reorganisation Act, two Court-Fees Acts, namely, the Travancore-Cochin Act II of 1125 and the Madras Act XIV of 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the old Acts) came to he current in different parts of this State of Kerala. The fees prescribed for the same matter under these two enactments differed largely; and therefore to bring about uniformity in the matter a consolidating Act, the Kerala Act X of 1960 (which will be referred to as the new Act), has been passed with the assent of the President on July 27, 1960, published in the Kerala Gazette on July 30, 1960, and brought into force on February 1, 1962 by a notification in the Gazette dated January 19, 1962. The new Act has mostly adopted the provisions of the Madras Act which prescribed a higher scale of court-fees in most matters than the Travancore-Cochin Act.

2. On February 12,1962, Shri. T. S. Krishnamoorthy Iyer filed a Vakalath for the respondents in S.A. No. 856 of 1961, paying court fee thereon under the repealed Travancore-Cochin Act II of 1125. The Office came to note that on fresh Vakalaths in pending cases some Advocates paid court-fee Rs. 3/- under the new Act, and some Rs. 2/- under the old Act and therefore referred the matter to the Bench as to whether Vakalaths, Miscellaneous Petitions, Copy Applications etc., filed after the commencement of the new Act in appeals from decrees or orders in suits instituted before the commencement of the Act are to be taxed court-fee under the old Acts or the new Act.

Notice was ordered on the reference to the Advocate General who readily appeared in response thereto and argued the matter on behalf of the State.

3. The answer to the reference is to be sought in S.87(2) of the new Act. Under it all proceedings by way of appeal, revision or otherwise arising from suits instituted before the commencement of the new Act, whether the proceedings be instituted before or after such commencement, shall be governed by the provisions of the old Acts. The section reads:

"87. (1) The Madras Court-fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1955, in force in the Malabar District referred to in sub-section (2) of S.5 of the States Reorganisation Act, 1956, the Travancore-Cochin Court Fees Act, 1125 and the Travancore-Cochin Suits Valuation Act, 1125, are hereby repealed.

(2) All suits and proceedings instituted before the commencement of this Act and all proceedings by way of appeal, revision or otherwise arising therefrom whether instituted before or after such commencement shall, notwithstanding the repeal of the said Acts be governed by the provisions of the said Acts and the rules made thereunder."

4. The word 'proceedings' presents little difficulty. Though the word is not defined in the Act, it finds definition in the Civil Rules of Practice, both of Travancore-Cochin and of Madras alike, to include "all documents presented to or filed in Court by any party or commissioner or other officer of court, other than the documents produced as evidence" and that is the accepted connotation of the word in legal parlance. The documents like Vakalaths, Miscellaneous Petitions, Copy Applications etc., in regard to which the reference is made must therefore be held 'proceedings' within the meaning of the above section.

5. But, the question is whether they do come within the purview of the expression "otherwise arising therefrom" in the section. The learned Advocate General points out that the word 'otherwise' following an

enumeration of particular objects is normally to be construed as denoting objects similar in nature to those enumerated before the word.

Sutherland on Statutory Construction refers to the doctrine of noscitur a sociis thus;

"In case the legislative intent is not clear the meaning of doubtful words may be determined by reference to their association with other associated words and phrases."

and continues to say,

"A variation of the doctrine of noscitur a sociis is that of ejusdem generis where general words