This case is posted, as directed, to hear the submission in regard to maintainability in re­spect of Court Fee.

2. Heard T.S.R. Venkatramana, learned counsel for the appellant.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant sub­mitted that the claimants are not questioning the award amount in the Appeal and that the consideration in the appeal is only with refer­ence to the liability fixed among the respon­dents, which is incapable of valuation and the Court fee payable is rupee one only and as such the claimants are not liable to pay any Court fee more than a rupee. He also relied on the-provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act to sus­tain his claim.

4. He also drew my attention to the defini­tion of pecuniary damages and special dam-ages given in the Law Lexicon with Legal Maxims, Second Edition, written by VENKATARAMAIYA, which reads as follows and contended that the claimants are not liable to pay any Court fee as directed by the Regis-try:

"Pecuniary Damages.— Such as can be es­timated in and compensated by money; not merely the loss of money or saleable prop­erty or rights, but all such loss, deprivation, or injury as can be made the subject of calcu­lation and or recompense in mon