K. VEERASWAMI, C.J. :- This matter raises a question of refund of court-fee. Pending the writ appeal filed by the appellant-petitioner, he got the relief, he wanted outside the court. At his request, the writ appeal had been dismissed as withdrawn. It had not been even numbered and was in the S. R. stage. The appellant therefore, applies for refund of court-fee.

2. There is no dispute that S. 70 of the Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act has no application, for, none of the grounds exists which would bring the case within its scope. In such a case, the course adopted by this court, in a number of cases, is that if it is so satisfied ex debito justitiae, it would certify that it is a fit and proper case for the revenue to refund the fee subject to the deduction of the usual spoliation charges.

3. One such case in point is Smt. Periathayya v. Narasinga Rao, 1966-2 Mad LJ 159 : (AIR 1966 Mad 423). One of us referred to Thammayya Naidu v. Venkataramanamma, ILR 55 Mad 641 : (AIR 1932 Mad 438) and Chidambara Chettiar in re, ILR 57 Mad 1028 : (AIR 1934 Mad 566) and summed up the position.

"It follows, that this court has a limited power to order refund, in exercise of its inherent po