In an appeal against an award under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, ad valorem court-fee is payable on the entire amount of compensation claimed, as per Section 8 of the Court Fees Act, 1870, read with Article 1, Schedule I of the Act.

V.R. NEVASKAR, J.

1. Mr. Rege for the respondent raises a preliminary objection that the court-fee paid along with the memorandum of appeal is inadequate. He contends that reading Section 8 of the Madhya Bharat Court-Fees Act along with the provisions of Article 1, Schedule I of that Act it is clear that the appellants ought to have paid court-fee on the entire amount of compensation which they seek to claim in this appeal.

2. On the other hand Mr. Saxena for the appellants contends that inasmuch as part of the amount of compensation is lying deposited in the bank having been deposited therein under the orders of the Court under Section 33 of the Land Acquisition Act and part is yet to be recovered from the Government it is enough for him to obtain declaration as to his right to the same as against the respondent particularly as the Government from whom the amount is to be obtained is not interested in this appeal and that for that reason payment of fixed court-fee of Rs. 15 is enough. He relied upon the decision reported in A.I.R. 1932 Mad 438 Thammayya Vs. Venkataramanamma in support of his contention.

3. In my opinion Mr. Rege's objection ought to prevail.

4. The facts of the case necessary for consideration of the preliminary objection are that Zamindar Uttamsingh owned certain lands in Kasba Ujjain. Out of the same Mangalji the father of appellants No. 1, 2 and 3 and husband of appellant No. 4 had obtained the disputed piece on rent from Uttamsingh After the lands had been acquired by the Government each of the parties set up a claim for compensation. Zamindar Uttamsingh for the whole amount of compensation awardable while Mangalji for his tenancy rights which had not come to an end then according to him.

5. The Collector gave an award by which he awarded Rs. 1,054 to Uttamsingh in respect of his Zamindari rights while Rs. 3,475 to Mangalji in respect of his tenancy rights.

6. Parties required the Collector to refer the matter to the District Judge under the Land Acquisition Act.

7. The learned District Judge after trial held that respondent Uttamsingh was entitled to the whole of the compensation amount which he fixed at Rs. 12,880 and not Mangalji of his heirs.

8. The present appeal is filed by Mangalji's heirs. The amount disallowed to them and which they claim is Rs. 12,880 and the question is whether they can, file this appeal on fixed Court-fee or ought to pay ad valorem court-fee on the aforesaid sum of Rs. 12,880.

9. Section 8 of the Courts-Fees Act which is relevant in this connection reads as follows:-

"The amount of fee payable under this Act on a memorandum of appeal against an order relating to compensation under any Act for the time being in force for the acquisition of land for public purposes shall be computed according to the difference between the amount awarded and the amount claimed by the appellant."

10. This section is not a charging provision. It only provides a rule for computation of court-fees in certain class of cases dealt with by it, The Section indicates that there is in the Court-fees Act elsewhere a charging provision under which court-fees are laviable ad valorem on the basis of difference between this amount claimed as compensation and the amount awarded.

11. The section therefore clearly suggests that no fixed court-fee is leviable in the cases governed by the section This view proceeds from the section itself and is also supported by the decision reported in A. I. R. 1932 Cal 346 in re Ananda Lal.

12. Rankin C. J. in that case observed as follows:-

"Section 8 while not itself imposing any fee upon any one provided a rule for computation of the fee payable under the Act in a certain class of cases. What it says is that, in the class of cases which it deals with, the amount of fee payable under the Act on a memorandum of appeal, it is to be computed according to the difference between the two sums. Now that section standing in the text of the Act proceeds clearly upon the assumption, otherwise i