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

2005 Supreme(Mad) 1518

High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.K. MISRA & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. KANNADASAN
Parvathi & Another - Appellant
Versus
Punjab National Bank, rep by its Branch Manager, K.K.Nagar Branch, Chennai & Others - Respondents
C.M.P.No.21215 of 2004 & OSA.No.179 of 2004
Decided On : 12 September 2005

Advocates Appeared:For the Petitioner:M. Ravindran, Senior Counsel for M/s. G.M. Mani Associates, Advocates. For the Respondents:R1, S. Venkateswaran, Advocate, N.R. Chandran, Advocate General.

Court-fees paid in appeal is refundable.

Headnote:Legal Services Authorities Act (XXXIX of 1987), Sec.21 - Court-fees Act (VII of 1870), Secs.13, 14, 15 - Tamil Nadu Court-fees and Suits Valuation Act (XIV of 1955), Sec.69 - Madras High Court-fees Rules, 1956 -There is no specific provision for refund of Court-fees paid in appeal - But Court-fees is refundable because of specific provision under Sec.21 of Legal Services Authorities Act - Court-fees paid in appeal is refundable.

Judgment :-

(Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to pass an order of refund the Court fees paid in the O.S.A.No.179/04 preferred under clause 15 of the letters patent against the order of the Honourable Mr. Justice AR. Ramalingam dated 9.12.03 and made in the exercise of the Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction of the High Court in C.S.No.1234/94.)

P.K. Misra, J.

The question in the present application relates to refund of court-fees in the appeal, which was amicably settled between the parties before the Lok Adalat.

2. O.S.A.NO.179 of 2004 was referred to Lok Adalat on 7.12.2004. After the disposal of the appeal in the above manner, the appellant filed CMP.No.21215 of 2004 for refund of the court fees of Rs.15,300/-paid on the memorandum of the grounds of the Original Side Appeal. When the matter came earlier, by order dated 17.1.2005, the court passed an order:

This matter may be listed before Lok Adalat for passing necessary orders regarding refund of Court-fee.

On 27.1.2005, the Lok Adaklat observed:

Since the matter has already been settled before the Adalat, they are entitled to refund of court fees under Section 21 of the Legal Services Authorities Act. The Appellants/petitioners are directed to produce this order to the Registrar and get refund of the court fees.

3. Thereafter, the Registry has raised objection regarding refund of court-fees on the ground that Section 21 of the Legal Services Authorities Act. 1987 refers to refund of court fee in the manner provided under the Court Fees Act, 1870, which is a Central Act, whereas all the Proceedings in Tamil Nadu are governed by Tamil Nadu Court fees and Suit Valuation Act, 1955. It is further indicated in the Office Note that levy of court-fees on the Original Side of the High Court is governed by the Madras High Court Fees Rules of 1956 and for refund of court fees the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Court fees and Suit Valuation Act alone would be applicable. Section 69 of the Tamil Nadu Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act, 1955 provides that when a suit is dismissed as settled out of court, half the court fees shall be refunded provided that no evidence is recorded on the merits of the claim and when evidence is recorded on the merits of the case, the question of refund of court fees does not arise under that Section. It is further indicated that there is no provision in the Tamil Nadu Court fees and Suit Valuation Act for refund of Court fees when the Original Side Appeal is compromised and a decree is passed in terms of such compromise. It is therefore indicated that since the Court Fees Act, 1870 is not applicable and only the Tamil Nadu Court fees and Suit Valuation Act is applicable, there is no question of refund of court fees. On the basis of such Office Note, the matter has been again placed before the Division Bench.

4. Since the question of refund of court-fees is involved and in that sense the interest of the State is affected and since the question of interpretation of the Legal Services Authorities Act as well as various Court Fees Acts has arisen, we have issued notice to the learned Advocate General as well as the Government Pleader to render assistance in the matter. Accordingly, the learned Advocate General was present in Court and he has made his submissions.

5. To be fair to the learned Advocate General, it can be stated immediately that he has pointed out that steps are being taken to make necessary amendment and the matter can be considered at a later stage. Even otherwise on merit, the learned Advocate General has brought to our notice several decisions throwing some light on the aspect. We record our appreciation for the fair manner in which submission has been made by the learned Advocate General.

6. The Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 is an Act enacted by the Parliament. Section 21 of such Act is extracted hereunder :-

21. Award of Lok Adalat.- Every award of







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 Back to top