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

1991 Supreme(MP) 508

T.N.SINGH
USHAS – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
U.K.JAIN, V.G.Khot

T. N. SINGH, J.

( 1 ) THE order impugned is in a sense a peculiar order. Legislature's language has apparently misled the learned Judge and confounded his wits, but what I have failed to appreciate is his approach in dealing with a reported decision of a Division Bench of Allahabad High Court.

( 2 ) AT the threshold the revisionists, applying for a Succession Certificate to recover the debts of deceased Ganeshan (whose legal representatives they are) are told that their application is not entertainable/triable as requisite court-fees did not "accompany" the application. That order, passed on 4-1-1991 by learned 7th Additional District Judge, Gwalior, is challenged in this revision.

( 3 ) THE question is of interpretation of Section 379 of Part X of the Indian Succession Act, which I extract :- "379. Mode of collecting Court-fees on certificates. (1) Every application for a certificate or for the extension of a certificate shall be accompanied by a deposit of a sum equal to the fee payable under the Court-fees Act, 1870, in respect of the certificate or extension applied for. (2) If the application is allowed, the sum deposited by the applicant shall be expended, under the direction









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