Back
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT AT JABALBUR BENCH
M.C.Garg, J.
Ramgopal and Another - Appellant
Versus
Haneef Khan and Others - Respondent
Misc. Appeal No. 755-2013
Decided On : 26-03-2013
Court-fee - Motor Vehicles Act - Section 173 - II Schedule of the Court-fees Act, 1870 - [AIR 1957 SC 540, AIR 1960 SC 980, 1980 MPLJ 801, 2009 (4) MPLJ 50] - The court discussed the question of Court-fee payable on an appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act for enhancement of compensation against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal after the amendment of the II Schedule of the Court-fees Act, 1870 in its application to the State of Madhya Pradesh. The court considered various judgments and held that the Court-fee on the appeal filed in the year 2013 arising out of an accident claim case except for those accidents claim case filed prior to 2nd of April, 2008 is payable only @ 2.5% and not @ 10% as was contemplated in the first State Amendment of the Court-fees Act by the State of Madhya Pradesh. The court also discussed the right of appeal and opined that the vested right of appeal cannot be taken away. It further held that the Court-fee payable on appeal is payable according to the law prevailing at the date of the institution of the suit or proceeding and not by the law that prevails at the date of its decision or at the date of the filing of the appeal. The court also considered the retrospective effect of a subsequent enactment which either takes away a right of appeal or impairs it by imposing a more stringent or onerous condition thereon.
Fact of the Case:
The court heard arguments on the question of Court-fee payable on an appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act for enhancement of compensation against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal after the amendment of the II Schedule of the Court-fees Act, 1870 in its application to the State of Madhya Pradesh.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Court-fee on the appeal filed in the year 2013 arising out of an accident claim case except for those accidents claim case filed prior to 2nd of April, 2008 is payable only @ 2.5% and not @ 10% as was contemplated in the first State Amendment of the Court-fees Act by the State of Madhya Pradesh. The court also held that the Court-fee payable on appeal is payable according to the law prevailing at the date of the institution of the suit or proceeding and not by the law that prevails at the date of its decision or at the date of the filing of the appeal.
Issues: The issues involved in the case were the determination of Court-fee payable on an appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act for enhancement of compensation against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal after the amendment of the II Schedule of the Court-fees Act, 1870 in its application to the State of Madhya Pradesh.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Court-fee on the appeal filed in the year 2013 arising out of an accident claim case except for those accidents claim case filed prior to 2nd of April, 2008 is payable only @ 2.5% and not @ 10% as was contemplated in the first State Amendment of the Court-fees Act by the State of Madhya Pradesh. The court also opined that the vested right of appeal cannot be taken away and that the Court-fee payable on appeal is payable according to the law prevailing at the date of the institution of the suit or proceeding and not by the law that prevails at the date of its decision or at the date of the filing of the appeal.
Final Decision: The court held that the Court-fee on the appeal filed in the year 2013 arising out of an accident claim case except for those accidents claim case filed prior to 2nd of April, 2008 is payable only @ 2.5% and not @ 10% as was contemplated in the first State Amendment of the Court-fees Act by the State of Madhya Pradesh.
This order shall govern-in M.A. No. 1283/2011, M.A. No. 2545/2011, M.A. No. 2551/2011, M.A. No. 2556/2011, M.A. No. 2562/2011, M.A. No. 2564/2011, M.A. No. 2566/2011, M.A. No. 2573/2011, M.A. No. 3593/2011, M.A. No. 4873/2011, M.A. No. 30/2012, M.A. No. 33/2012, M.A. No. 34/2012, M.A. No. 36/2012, M.A. No. 38/2012, M.A. No. 45/2012, M.A. No. 1492/2012, M.A. No. 2452/2012, M.A. No. 642/2013, M.A. No. 668/2013, M.A. No. 669/2013, M.A. No. 671/2013, M.A. No. 672/2013, M.A. No. 673/2013, M.A. No. 674/2013, M.A. No. 675/2013, M.A. No. 676/2013, M.A. No. 679/2013, M.A. No. 680/2013, M.A. No. 687/2013, M.A. No. 688/2013, M.A. No. 689/2013, M.A. No. 690/2013, M.A. No. 692/2013, M.A. No. 693/2013, M.A. No. 696/2013, M.A. No. 699/2013, M.A. No. 700/2013, M.A. No. 701/2013, M.A. No. 704/2013, M.A. No. 705/2013, M.A. No. 707/2013, M.A. No. 709/2013, M.A. No. 710/2013, M.A. No. 711/2013, M.A. No. 712/2013, M.A. No. 713/2013, M.A. No. 715/2013, M.A. No. 724/2013, M.A. No. 725/2013, M.A. No. 726/2013, M.A. No. 733/2013, M.A. No. 734/2013, M.A. No. 735/2013, M.A. No. 737/2013, M.A. No. 738/2013, M.A. No. 739/2013, M.A. No. 740/2013, M.A. No. 741/2013, M.A. No. 743/2013, M.A. No. 744/2013, M.A. No. 745/2013, M.A. No. 746/2013, M.A. No. 747/2013, M.A. No. 748/2013, M.A. No. 751/2013, M.A. No. 756/2013, M.A. No. 757/2013, M.A. No. 758/2013, M.A. No. 759/2013, M.A. No. 761/2013, M.A. No. 763/2013, M.A. No. 764/2013, M.A. No. 766/2013, M.A. No. 769/2013, M.A. No. 770/2013, M.A. No. 773/2013, M.A. No. 774/2013, M.A. No. 776/2013, M.A. No. 777/2013, M.A. No. 778/2013, M.A. No. 779/2013, M.A. No. 780/2013, M.A. No. 781/2013, M.A. No. 783/2013, M.A. No. 784/2013, M.A. No. 785/2013, M.A. No. 786/2013, M.A. No. 787/2013, M.A. No. 788/2013, M.A. No. 790/2013, M.A. No. 792/2013, M.A. No. 793/2013, M.A. No. 794/2013, M.A. No. 795/2013, M.A. No. 797/2013, M.A. No. 798/2013, M.A. No. 800/2013, M.A. No. 801/2013, M.A. No. 804/2013, M.A. No. 805/2013, M.A. No. 806/2013, M.A. No. 807/2013, M.A. No. 810/2013, M.A. No. 811/2013, M.A. No. 812/2013, M.A. No. 813/2013, M.A. No. 814/2013, M.A. No. 816/2013, M.A. No. 817/2013, M.A. No. 818/2013, M.A. No. 819/2013, M.A. No. 821/2013, M.A. No.-823/2013, M.A. No. 824/2013, M.A. No. 825/2013, M.A. No. 826/2013, M.A. No. 830/2013, M.A. No. 237/2011, M.A. No. 365/2013, M.A. No. 47/2012, M.A. No. 51/2012, M.A. No. 56/2012, M.A. No. 60/2012, M.A. No. 61/2012, M.A. No. 62/2012, M.A. No. 63/2012, M.A. No. 64/2012, M.A. No. 66/2012, M.A. No. 67/2012, M.A. No. 69/2012, M.A. No. 73/2012, M.A. No. 75/2012, M.A. No. 76/2012, M.A. No. 77/2012, M.A. No. 789/2013, M.A. No. 822/2013, M.A. No. 827/2013, M.A. No. 828/2013, M.A. No. 829/2013, M.A. No. 831/2013, M.A. No. 832/2013, M.A. No. 833/2013, M.A. No. 834/2013, M.A. No. 835/2013, M.A. No. 8367 2013, M.A. No. 838/2013, M.A. No. 840/2013, M.A. No. 842/2013, M.A. No. 843/2013, M.A. No. 844/2013, M.A. No. 845/2013, M.A. No. 847/2013, M.A. No. 852/2013, M.A. No. 855/2013, M.A. No. 857/2013, M.A. No. 858/2013, M.A. No. 859/2013, M.A. No. 860/2013 and M.A. No. 78/2012.
2. Arguments heard on the question as to what amount of Court-fee is payable on an appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act for enhancement of compensation against the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal after the amendment of the II Schedule of the Court-fees Act, 1870 in its application to the State of Madhya Pradesh.
3. It has been argued on behalf of the learned Counsel for the appellants that after coming into force of the Second Amendment in the Court-fees Act by way of Madhya Pradesh Amendment Act, therein vide Court-fees (Madhya Pradesh) Amendment Act, 2012, the Court-fee on appeal filed in the year 2013 arising out of an accident claim case except for those accidents claim case filed prior to 2nd of April, 2008 is payable only @ 2.5% and not @ 10% as was contemplated in the first State Amendment of the Court-fees Act by the State of Madhya Pradesh vide first amendment, i.e., the
AI
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
