Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.
Paulrajan - Appellant
Versus
The Spl. District Revenue Officer - Respondent
C.R.P.(MD)No.1696 of 2024
Decided on : 06-09-2024
ORDER :
PRAYER : Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the docket order made in unnumbered application in Arb.O.P.No. of 2023 dated 12.12.2023 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Theni and to number the unnumbered Arb.O.P.No. of 2023 filed by the petitioners herein and to proceed in accordance with law and allow this civil revision petition.
Heard the learned counsel on either side.
2. The petitioner wants to question the arbitration award passed on 23.11.2015 under Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act 1956. The petitioner claims to have presented the set aside petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in time. It is further claimed that the bundle went missing and it has now been re-constructed. I do not want to go into those issues. The only question I am now concerned is whether the Court fee paid by the petitioner is correct. According to the petitioners, they have to pay the Court fee under the unamended Tamil Nadu Court-Fees and Suit Valuation Act, 1955. The Court below has made a return that the Court fee has to be paid as per the amendment which came into force on 01.03.2017.
3. The issue raised in the civil revision petition is no longer res integra. A learned Judge of this Court vide order dated 19.06.2023 in S.A.SR.No.24518 of 2018 (V.Rajarathinam V. V.Sivasubramanian and others) had held that the amended provisions of the Tamil Nadu Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act, 1955, enhancing the Court fees vide the Amended Act would not apply to an appeal arising out of a suit instituted prior to the amendment ie. prior to 01.03.2017. The same principle will apply to the case on hand also. In this case, the award was passed on 23.11.2015. The set aside petition was filed under Section 34 of the Act against the award passed on 23.11.2015 which is prior to the amended Act. Consequential arbitration petition has to be valued in terms of the unamended Act that was applicable at the time when the arbitration award was passed.
4. The other issues have not been gone into. The petitioners are at liberty to re-present the unnumbered Arbitration OP. This revision petition stands allowed on these terms. No costs.
The amended provisions of the Tamil Nadu Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act do not apply to appeals arising from suits instituted prior to the amendment.
Exemption under Section 72 of the Tamil Nadu Court Fees Act does not apply when challenging an award under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act; court fees are payable for such appeals.
Amendments to court fee applications should be allowed if they do not cause prejudice to the other party.
A revision petition regarding inadequacy of court fee is not maintainable when jurisdiction is not in question, as it is deemed a dispute between the litigant and the Registry.
The court clarified the applicable valuation sections under the Tamil Nadu Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act for declaratory relief and document enforceability.
Court fee for Section 34 arbitration petition not based on award amount; distinct from Section 24 appeals.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
