ORDER

1. Heard on I.A.No.3211/2021, which is an application for ignoring the objection raised by the registry of this Court regarding payment of deficit court fees.

2. Brief facts of the case which are relevant for disposal of aforesaid application are that the appellants filed this Miscellaneous Appeal against the award dated 22.1.2021 passed by MACT, Mandla in Claim Case No.778/2018 for enhancement of compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal to the applicants. This Miscellaneous Appeal is for enhancement of a sum of Rs.6,00,000/-. Office put the objection that appeal is not maintainable without payment of Court fees on that enhanced amount i.e. Rs.6,00,000/-. Present application has been filed for overruling that objection.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that according to Article 11 of Schedule II of the Court Fees Act 2.5% Court fees should be paid on the enhanced amount. The amount claimed by the appellants in the appeal cannot be called as enhanced amount, but the enhanced amount will be such as would be given by the Court after adjudication of the claim of the appellants. Registry wrongly demanded 2.5% Court fees on the amount which is claimed by the appellants in the memo of appeal. There is no certainty as to what amount will be awarded by the Court. Appellants are only required to pay Court fee on the amount which will be determined as enhanced amount by this Court at the time of judgement of this appeal. So appellants may be allowed to make payment of Court fee at the time of final decision of the appeal on enhanced compensation, which may be determined by the Court. In this regard learned counsel also placed reliance on this Court'™s judgments passed in Preetam Lal Garg v. Vijay Kumar Gujrati, passed in MA.No.852/2015 vide order dated 21/12/2016, Smt. Sushma Dhurve & Others v. Dayal Singh & Others passed in MA.No.5539/2019 vide order dated 19.12.2019, Suresh Maravi v. Akash Singh Rajput & Others passed in MA.No.1996/2020 vide order dated 10.9.2020 and Ravi Shankar v. Arjun Lal & Others passed in M.A. No.2187/2020 vide order dated 23.9.2020.

4. This Court has gone through the record and arguments advanced by the counsel of the appellants. This appeal has been filed by the appellants u/s 173 Motor Vehicles Act. The memo of appeal preferred u/s 173 Motor Vehicles Act is required to be affixed with court Fees as per Article 11 of Schedule II of Court fees Act, which reads as thus :-

(a) when presented to the High Court-

(i) By the claimant for enhancement of 2.5 percent of the amount of award passed by the Motor enhanced amount Accident Claims Tribunal. Claimed in appeal

5. From the wordings of the provisions of Article 11 of Schedule II of Court fees Act Â"2.5 percent of the enhanced amount claimed in appeal" it is clear that Court fees will be paid on that enhanced amount which is claimed by the appellants in their appeal memo and not on the amount which will be determined by the Court after adjudication of the claim of the appellants and the Court fees is payable at the time of presentation of the appeal not after judgement.

6. Section 4 of the Court Fees Act, 1870 bars the Court from receiving plaint/appeal if it does not bear the proper Court fees. Although section 149 CPC acts as an exception to the said bar and enables the Court to permit the plaintiff to pay the deficit Court fees at a subsequent stage. But this section also does not give unfettered power to Court for giving time to applicant for paying court fee.

7. Hon'ble apex Court in the case of A. Nawab John & Ors v. V. N. Subramaniyam [(2012)7 SCC 738] in pera 23 of its judgement observed as thus:-

"The section 149 CPC does not confer an absolute right in favour of a plaintiff to pay the court fee as and when it pleases the plaintiff. It only enables a plaintiff to seek the indulgence of the Court to permit the payment of court fee at a point of time later than the presentation of the plaint. The exercise of the discretion by the Court