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

1955 Supreme(Mad) 231

KRISHNASWAMI NAYUDU
Ganga Naicken – Appellant
Versus
A. Sundaram Aiyar – Respondent


Advocates:
A. Palaniswamy for Petitioners.
K. Desikachari for Respondent.

Order

This reference raises a question of the construction of section 87(2) of the Madras Court Fees Act XIV of 1955.

The matter directly arose out of a copy application filed for obtaining a copy of judgment and decree in Civil Revision Petition No. 910 of 1954 where a two annas court-fee stamp was affixed on the application, which was the fee payable under the Court Fees Act of 1870, the present court-fee being four annas for the same application under Article 11(a) and (b) of Schedule II to the Act. The contention of the learned Advocate is that the application for a copy is in respect of a proceeding arising from a suit or proceeding before the commencement of the Act, and as such under section 87(2), such an application would be governed by the previous Court Fees Act VII of 1870.

Section 87 of Act XIV of 1955 is in the following terms:

“(1) The Court Fees Act, 1870 (Central Act VII of 1870) in its application to the State of Madras and in relation to the fees and stamps other than fees and stamps relating to documents presented or to be presented before an Officer serving under the Central Government and the Suits Valuation Act, 1887 (Central Act VII of 1887), in its application




















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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top