The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the provisions of the Court Fees Acts and the General Clauses Act, particularly regarding the exemption of court fee on applications for return of documents and the amount of court fee payable on an application for copies of more than one document.

Headnote:
Court Fee - Applications for Return of Documents - Travancore Court Fees Act, Cochin Court Fees Act - S.13, S.22, S.32, S.36 - The court discussed the provisions of the Travancore Court Fees Act and the Cochin Court Fees Act, particularly focusing on the exemption of court fee on applications for return of documents. The court interpreted the relevant sections and rules, and concluded that the law relating to the payment of court fee on applications for the return of documents was not the same in the Travancore area and the Cochin area. The court also addressed the amount of court fee payable on an application for copies of more than one document, providing a detailed analysis and interpretation of the relevant provisions and rules.
Fact of the Case:

The District Judge of Anjikaimal made references to the Court regarding the Court fee to be paid on applications for return of documents filed in court and on applications for copies of documents in court. The matter was consolidated into one reference and referred to a Full Bench for an authoritative ruling.
Finding of the Court:

The court found that the law relating to the payment of court fee on applications for the return of documents was not the same in the Travancore area and the Cochin area. It also concluded that for obtaining copies of more than one document in one suit or proceeding, one application can be taxed only with the fee prescribed for one application. If the documents of which copies are applied for are in more than one suit or proceeding, separate applications will have to be filed in each of the suits or proceedings and each application will have to be taxed with a fee of one and a half annas.
Issues: The issues involved the interpretation of the provisions of the Travancore Court Fees Act and the Cochin Court Fees Act, particularly regarding the exemption of court fee on applications for return of documents and the amount of court fee payable on an application for copies of more than one document.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the interpretation of the relevant sections and rules of the Court Fees Acts, as well as the General Clauses Act. The court also considered the rules of practice governing the matter and applied the rule of interpretation most beneficial to the subject in the case of statutes imposing taxes.
Final Decision: The court held that the law relating to the payment of court fee on applications for the return of documents was not the same in the Travancore area and the Cochin area. It also provided detailed guidelines on the amount of court fee payable on an application for copies of more than one document, clarifying the requirements for separate applications and the applicable fees.

Judgment :-

1. The District Judge of Anjikaimal made two references to this Court regarding the Court fee to be paid on applications for return of documents filed in court and on applications for copies of documents in court. The two references were consolidated into one and were heard by a Division Bench. As it was thought desirable to have an authoritative ruling on the questions raised in the two references the matter was referred to a Full Bench.

2. With regard to the levying of Court Fee on applications for return of documents from Court the practice in Travancore and Cochin areas of the State is not the same. Neither the Travancore Court Fees Act (Act VI of 1087) nor the Cochin Court Fees Act (Act II of 1080) which were repealed by Act II of 1125 contained any provision exempting applications for return of documents from petition fee. Schedule II, No. I(b), paragraph 2, of the Court Fees Act of Travancore provided for the payment of a court fee of eight annas on applications for petitions presented to a civil court which were not otherwise provided for in the Act, and Schedule II, No. 1(d) prescribed a fee of two rupees on applications presented to the High Court. The Cochin Act prescribed a fee of one rupee on applications presented to the High Court. Except for this difference the provision in the Cochin Act was similar to that of the Travancore Act. The present Act also contains the same provisions as those in the Travancore Act. Neither S.13 of the Travancore Act which exempted certain documents from payment of court fee nor the corresponding section of the Cochin Act (namely, S.18) included applications for return of documents from court.

S.13 of the present Court Fees Act also which corresponds to S.13 of the repealed Travancore Act and S.18 of the repealed Cochin Act does not include such applications. But S.22 of the Travancore Act empowered the Government to reduce or remit all or any of the fees mentioned in the schedules annexed to the Act. S.32 of the Cochin Act also contained a similar provision. The corresponding provision in the present Court Fees Act is S.36. In the exercise of the power conferred on the Government under S. 22 of the Travancore Court Fees Act a notification was issued by the Travancore Government on 25th January 1915 exempting from payment of court fee "applications made by persons, not being parties to the suit, for the return of documents and other articles produced by them in pursuance of an order of the court". The rule contained in this notification was embodied in the Travancore Civil Courts' Guide of 1922, as rule No. 344. The Civil Courts' Guide of 1944 which replaced the old Guide has embodied the same provision in R.617(1). The new Guide, however, embodied additional provisions in R. 605, sub-rr. 6, 7 and 8. They are to the following effect:

"605 [6]. Taxed applications for return of documents are necessary only in the case of documents by which the return is demanded before disposal of suit. After disposal of the suit the parties are entitled to get back without a taxed application, such of the documents as can be returned.

M. The following are the exceptions to the rule that all applications for return of documents before disposal of suit should be taxed.

[8]. Shop books or other books of account in current use filed along with the plaint and accompanied by a copy of the entry on which the plaintiff reliefs. The court or any officer as it appoints in this behalf shall forthwith mark the document for the purpose of identification and after examining and verifying the copy with the original shall, if it is found correct, certify it to be so and return the book to the plaintiff and cause the copy to be filed. The point of time to which this applies is the filing of the suit. If an account book is filed for being exhibited during the trial of the case and if a party requires its return after it is exhibited and before the disposal of the suit, the general rule of a taxed application s

Click Here to Read the rest of this document