After the lengthy arguments I have heard in this case the principles that to my mind appear to emerge for consideration and application in this case are these:(1) A written statement pleading a set-off, whether legal or equitable, must bear Court-fee whether the set-off is tantamount to an extinguishment of the plaint claim or to a partial reduction of the plaint claim; (2) where the written statement on its allegations refers to the payments which will have the effect of either extinguishing or reducing the suit claim as payments which in law must be held to be in the nature of payments to the plaintiff himself, the defendant is not under an obligation to pay any Court-fee on that amount although when he fails to prove the legal effect of the payments in question to be that of payments to the plaintiff himself the plea of the credit claimed by the defendant on the foot of payments may have to fail. This latter principle is really a corollary to the larger principle applicable to plaints that the payment of Court-fee on the plaint must be judged with reference to the allegations in the plaint. I have carefully examined the present written statement with the aid of counsel