MANGILAL VS RAMESHCHANDRA PORWAL

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

A.K.GOHIL
MANGILAL – Appellant
Versus
RAMESHCHANDRA PORWAL – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
R.C. Kochatta, for the Appellant; N.S. Purohit, for the Respondent

ORDER

A.K. Gohil, J.

This Civil Revision u/s 115 of the CPC is directed against the order dated 15-1-2000 passed by the District Judge, Ratlam in C.O.S. No.30-A/99 whereby decided preliminary issue against them regarding payment of Court-fees by legal representatives of the exempted deceased plaintiff u/s 35 of the Court Fees Act.

The facts giving rise to the revision petition are that the original plaintiff Smt. Lilabai filed a suit for partition without payment of Court-fees. She was a lady and was not having income more than Rs. 6,000.00 per year, therefore, she was exempted from payment of Court-fees vide order dated 23-8-1995. She died during the pendency of the suit. On her death her L.Rs. were substituted and on the objection of the defendants the trial Court framed an issue whether the legal representatives of the deceased plaintiff are also entitled for exemption as per the Notification issued u/s 35 of the Court Fees Act. The learned trial Court after hearing parties relying on the case of Vandna Bhargava Vs. Kapil Bhargava and Others, , held that the substituted L.Rs. are required to pay Court-fees and it was further directed that if they are not in a position to pay the Co