( 1. ) THIS appeal valued at Rs. 1,95,72,450/-, has been preferred as M. A. No. 215/2005 under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act against an award passed by First Additional District Judge, Katni in Land Acquisition Case No.

66/2000, 68/2000 and 18/2001 on 6-10-2004. The Court fee which has been paid is Rs. 15/- payable on miscellaneous appeal. An application has been filed under Section 149 of CPC in which prayer has been made that appellant may be allowed to make payment of Court fee at the time of final decision of the appeal on compensation which may be determined. Another application has been filed to convert the miscellaneous appeal into first appeal.

( 2. ) AD valorem Court fee is required to be paid on the valuation made in the appeal, of which enhancement has been prayed for in the appeal. ( 3. ) SHRI S. K. Dwivedi, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that appellant may be allowed to make the payment of Court fee at the time of final decision of the appeal on compensation, which may be determined and miscellaneous appeal be allowed to be converted into first appeal. He has placed reliance on a decision of this Court in Bhag Singh and Ors. v. Union Territory of Chandigarh through the Land Acquisition Collector, Chandigarh 1985 MPLJ 523.

( 4. ) SHRI Samdarshi Tiwari, learned Dy. Govt. Advocate has submitted that first appeal lies not miscellaneous appeal. A Full Bench of this Court in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Seth Gowardhandas Maheshwari 1993 MPLJ 536, has opined that an award of the Civil Court made in land acquisition cases is a decree within the meaning of Section 2 (2) of the Civil Procedure Code and in case of an appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act from such award, Article I-A of Schedule 1 of the Court Fees Act is attracted and ad valorem Court fee is leviable on the memorandum of appeal. He has placed reliance on a decision of the Apex Court in Sahadu Gangaram Bhagade v. Special Deputy Collector, Ahmednagar and Anr. , AIR1971 SC 1887 , (1971 ) 73 BOMLR903 , (1970 )1 SCC685 , [1971 ]1 SCR146 and also decision of Full Bench of this Court in Union of India v. Smt. Kanti Sharma and Ors. 1998 (2) MPLJ 658, in which it was opined by this Court that Court fee in an appeal under Section 11, Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act is payable ad valorem under Section 8 of the Court Fees Act.

( 5. ) IT is not in dispute at Bar and rightly that ad valorem Court fee is payable in an appeal filed under Section 54 of Land Acquisition Act in view of the Full Bench decisions of this Court in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Seth Gowardhandas Maheshwari and Union of India v. Smt. Kanti Sharma and Ors. (supra ). The Court fee is payable on valuation mentioned in appeal which is under question. In case enhancement is prayed, Court fees is payable ad valorem on amount sought to be enhanced. In case award is challenged as excessive it is payable on amount which is under question.

( 6. ) THE main question for consideration is whether the appellant can be allowed to make payment of the Court fee at the time of final decision of the appeal. Reliance has been placed by Shri S. K. Dwivedi, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant on a decision of Apex Court in Bhag Singh and Ors. v. Union Territory of Chandigarh through the Land Acquisition Collector, Chandigarh (supra ). The facts of the said case are totally different. There was refusal to extend the time for making payment of Court fees on the claim made for enhancing compensation. Extension of time for payment of Court fees was objected by the State. The extension of time for payment of Court fees was refused. It was held by the Apex Court that to deny this benefit to the appellants would tantamount to permitting the State Government to acquire the land of the appellants on payment of less than the true market value. The State Government must do what is fair and just to the citizen and should not, as far as possible, except i