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

1966 Supreme(Ori) 13

S.BARMAN
Puinbasi Majhiani – Appellant
Versus
Shiba Bhue – Respondent


Advocates:
G.R. Rao and G. Narasimham, for Appellant; Advocate General, for Respondents.

ORDER :- In this reference made by the Registrar the question is whether the court-fee on a memorandum of appeal from an order refusing to grant probate of a will in R. S. 15 of 1963 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Bolangir, is payable under Article 11 or Article 17-A of schedule II of the Court Fees Act. The appellant has valued the appeal for the purpose of jurisdiction at Rs. 5,000 but paid court-fee of Rs. 6/- treating it as an appeal against an order under Article 11. The Stamp Reporter pointed out that the appeal is from a decree and the Court fee is Rs. 150/- as payable under Article 17-A and that accordingly the deficit of Rs. 144/- is realisable from the appellant. The appellant contested the stamp report before the Registrar stating that the order appealed against is not a decree and that the court-fee payable is not under Article 17-A.

2. Having regard to the position that the matter has assumed some general importance for the reasons stated by the Registrar he referred the matter to me as Taxing Judge for a decision on the point.

3. Article 11 on which the appellant relies is as follows :

"11. Memorandum of appeal when the appeal is from an order inclusive of an orde























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