Bose, J—The only question for decision now is whether a set-off in excess of Rs 50 should have been allowed. The defendant claimed Rs. 325 but only paid court-fees on Rs. 50. The lower Court has allowed him Rs. 225 and has passed a decree for that sum against the plaintiff. The learned Judge-allowed the defendant to pay court-fees on the difference after his decision. This he had no power to do. There is no difference between an equitable set-off and a legal setoff in the matter of court-fees. In both cases court-fees must be paid ad valorem on the amount claimed: Bhikoobhoy Govindji & Co. v. Central Provinces Contracting and Mining Syndicate, Nagpur, 1936 AIR(Nag) 222 and Hargovind v. Shrikrishnadas, 1936 AIR(Nag) 290 No claim for set-off can be decreed in excess of the amount claimed: Girdharilal v. Surajmal Payment of further court-fees after decision is not permissible: Reazai Karim v. Mohammad Israil, 1939 AIR(Cal) 415 Counsel for the non-applicant defendant relies on Ragavaji Sait v. Annamalai Mudali 17 M.L.J. 625, where a claim for damages was treated as if it were on the same footing as one for accounts and mesne ''profits. With respect I consider this is wrong and