A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, T.R.RAVI, SOPHY THOMAS
SIVARAMAN, S/O. MANJANAMKATTIL VELAYUDHAN – Appellant
Versus
SURESH, S/O. ARIMBULLY VIJAYAN – Respondent
ORDER :
A.Muhamed Mustaque, J.
1. The liability of the plaintiff, who has partly lost or completely lost the case to pay court fee under Order 33 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is the question before this Full Bench, in reference. The reference is in the context of the amendments to the CPC, published in the gazette on 30/12/1999 and 23/05/2002, respectively, both of which subsequently came into force on 1/07/2002. The Division Bench, while referring this matter, noted the impact and effect of the State Amendment prior to the Central Amendments to the CPC and doubted the operation of the State Amendment after the 1999 and 2002 Amendments to the CPC.
2. We heard the learned counsels for the private parties as well as the learned Government Pleader.
3. Order 33 of the CPC refers to a suit by an indigent person. It specifically refers to recovery of court fees from the plaintiff when he succeeds in the suit and also when he fails in the suit. The reference is on the point involved when the indigent plaintiff fails in the suit. Order 33 Rule 11 CPC as it was originally, reads thus:
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.