AI Overview...
Court Fee Payable on Review Petitions: A Comprehensive Guide
Filing a review petition under Order 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908, can be a crucial step to correct errors in judicial orders. However, one common hurdle is determining the court fee payable on review petition. This often leads to objections from court registries, delays, or even dismissal of the petition. In this guide, we break down the rules, drawing from key judicial precedents across Indian High Courts.
Understanding the correct fee is essential to avoid procedural pitfalls. Fees vary by jurisdiction, the nature of the original proceeding (suit, appeal, writ), and whether the petitioner qualifies as indigent. This is general information based on case law and not specific legal advice—consult a lawyer for your case.
What is a Review Petition and Why Court Fees Matter?
A review petition seeks reconsideration of a court's judgment due to errors apparent on the record, new evidence, or other grounds under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC. Courts scrutinize the fee paid closely, as insufficient payment can lead to rejection.
Key principle: Court fees are governed by state-specific Court Fees Acts (e.g., Kerala Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1959; Rajasthan Court-fees Act, 1952). These acts classify petitions into fixed fees or ad valorem (based on value).
- Fixed fees apply to most review petitions as 'original petitions' or miscellaneous applications.
- Ad valorem fees may apply if linked to the original suit's value, especially in appeals or references.
Fixed Court Fee for Review Petitions: Common Scenarios
In many cases, review petitions attract a fixed court fee, treating them as standalone applications.
Review of Writ Petitions
For reviews against High Court writ judgments:
- Rajasthan: Article 11(k) of Schedule II, Rajasthan Court-fees Act, 1952 mandates a fixed fee of Rs. 10/-. The court clarified: A review petition is an original petition and a fixed court-fee of Rs. 10/- is payable. CHUNNILAL VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN - 1972 Supreme(Raj) 63
- Himachal Pradesh: Article 1(d)(iv) of the Second Schedule, Himachal Pradesh Court Fees Act, 1968 applies for reviews of Article 226 petitions. Amin Chand VS State of H. P. - 1973 Supreme(HP) 3
Reviews in Appeals or Suits
- If the appeal was dismissed for non-payment of court fee, the dismissal order is not a decree under CPC Section 2(2). Thus, review fee is fixed or reduced, not ad valorem on the suit value. The order rejecting the appeal is not a decree. Narikuniyil Narayanan VS Palol Ummer - 2009 Supreme(Ker) 574
- In partition suits or land acquisition references, fee is often 1.5 times the plaint fee if no appeal is pending. Kannegolla Naghabhushanam VS Land Acquisition Officer - 1992 Supreme(AP) 637
Bullet points from cases:
- Kerala: Review of pauper appeals—no fee if indigent status continues. Mathai Brijitha VS Thankappan Nair - 1992 Supreme(Ker) 241
- Forma pauperis reviews: Allowed if original suit/appeal was filed as pauper. A review petition is a proceeding connected with the suit or appeal and therefore, no court-fee is payable. Ananta Reddy VS Vasudev Reddy - 1970 Supreme(AP) 193
Ad Valorem vs. Fixed Fee: When Does It Apply?
Fees depend on context:
Linked to Original Proceedings
- Kerala Court Fees Act, Schedule I Article 5: For reviews of judgments where no appeal is pending, fee is one and a half times the plaint fee. Court fee payable is one and half of the fee payable on the plaint. Kannegolla Naghabhushanam VS Land Acquisition Officer - 1992 Supreme(AP) 637
- Second appeals: Proviso II of Section 52 does not apply to reviews, only appeals. Fixed or half appeal fee may suffice. Shahul Hameed VS Sulekha Beevi - 2016 Supreme(Ker) 751
Indigent Persons and Exemptions
- Petitioners allowed to sue/appeal in forma pauperis (as paupers) can file reviews without fee initially. Courts must verify continued indigency before demanding payment. The status of an indigent person, once recognized by the court, cannot be changed without proper challenge. Mumtaz Ara VS Gauhar Hussain - 2023 Supreme(Del) 1619
- Opportunity to cure defects: Courts should allow rectification of fee shortages rather than outright dismissal. ROSILY Vs ROSHAN - 2019 Supreme(Online)(KER) 75125
Special Cases: Writs, Revisions, and References
- Writ reviews: Treated as original; fixed fee under Schedule II. No ad valorem unless value disputed.
- Arbitration revisions: Additional fee under Section 76(1) only if 'amount in dispute' exists—e.g., Rs. 100/- for limitation orders. KSFE STAFF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD NO777 vs STATE OF KERALA - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 57055
- Land acquisition: Reference judgments reviewed with fee based on original petition value. Kannegolla Naghabhushanam VS Land Acquisition Officer - 1992 Supreme(AP) 637
Judicial Guidelines on Fee Objections
Courts emphasize fairness:
- Registry objections: Must be resolved by allowing supplementation, not rejection. Full Benches have ruled dismissals for default fees improper if not decrees. Narikuniyil Narayanan VS Palol Ummer - 2009 Supreme(Ker) 574
- Multiple petitioners: Each pays separately unless consolidated; common vakalatnama suffices for one fee set. Tamaskar V. G. v. State of Chhattisgarh and Others - 2008 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 27
- Review of fee decisions: Section 12(1) of Kerala Act allows review/correction of initial fee rulings. WE-BUILD PVT. LTD. v. C. KAMALESWARAN - 1981 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 21
In CPC amendments context (Justice Jagannadha Rao Committee), costs including fees aim to curb delays, but reviews retain flexibility. Incidental mentions highlight realistic costs: costs have to be actual reasonable costs including... court fee. Salem Advocate Bar Association, T. N. VS Union Of India - 2005 5 Supreme 236
State-Specific Variations
| State/Act | Typical Review Fee | Key Reference |
|-----------|-------------------|---------------|
| Kerala (1959 Act) | Fixed or 1/2 appeal fee; no fee for paupers | Mathai Brijitha VS Thankappan Nair - 1992 Supreme(Ker) 241 Narikuniyil Narayanan VS Palol Ummer - 2009 Supreme(Ker) 574 |
| Rajasthan (1952 Act) | Rs. 10/- fixed for writ reviews | CHUNNILAL VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN - 1972 Supreme(Raj) 63 |
| Himachal Pradesh (1968 Act) | Schedule II Art. 1(d)(iv) | Amin Chand VS State of H. P. - 1973 Supreme(HP) 3 |
| A.P./Others | Ad valorem if value-based | Kannegolla Naghabhushanam VS Land Acquisition Officer - 1992 Supreme(AP) 637 |
Note: Always check local rules; High Courts issue practice directions.
Practical Tips for Litigants
- Calculate correctly: Use court fee calculators or consult clerks; reference original proceeding's fee.
- File with affidavit: Support indigency claims.
- Cure deficiencies: Courts favor merits over technicalities—seek time to pay shortfalls.
- Avoid delays: Pay excess if unsure; seek refund later.
- Writs caution: Fixed fees prevail; 'plaint' doesn't extend to writs. CHUNNILAL VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN - 1972 Supreme(Raj) 63
Key Takeaways
- Court fee payable on review petition is typically fixed (Rs. 10-100) or linked to original fee, not always ad valorem.
- No fee for indigents if status unchanged; reviews of non-decree dismissals get leniency.
- Jurisdiction matters: State Acts rule; CPC provides framework.
- Justice over technicality: Courts allow curing defects. ROSILY Vs ROSHAN - 2019 Supreme(Online)(KER) 75125
Disclaimer: Legal fees and procedures vary by case, court, and updates. This synthesizes precedents like those from Kerala, Rajasthan High Courts but isn't advice. Seek professional counsel for tailored guidance. Laws evolve—verify current rules.
For more on CPC procedures, explore our guides on amendments Salem Advocate Bar Association, T. N. VS Union Of India - 2005 5 Supreme 236 or judicial reviews.
Search Results for "Court Fee Payable on Review Petitions Guide"
2005 5 Supreme 236 • India - Supreme Court
Y.K.SABHARWAL, D.M.DHARMADHIKARI, TARUN CHATTERJEE
the expenses incurred towards the fee payable to the Commissioner is likely to be less than expenditure incurred for attending the ... The replies shall be sent after due application of mind. ... lodging, if any, or any other incidental cost besides the party of the court fee, lawyer’s fee, typing and other cost in relation ... amount of fee #H....
1981 0 Supreme(SC) 511 • India - Supreme Court
A.C.GUPTA, V.D.TULZAPURKAR, S.MURTAZA FAZAL ALI, R.S.PATHAK, P.N.BHAGWATI, D.A.DESAI, E.S.VENKATARAMIAH
or injunction to be granted on an application for judicial review. ... be subject to judicial review? ... (l)(b) may be made by way of an application for judicial review, and on such an application the Court may grant the declaration or
1975 0 Supreme(SC) 22 • India - Supreme Court
A.ALAGIRISWAMI, A.C.GUPTA, A.N.RAY, K.K.MATHEW, Y.V.CHANDRACHUD
A fee is in return for a special service rendered to individual by Govt. involving an element of ‘quid pro quo’. ... but of nature of price of a privilege to the purchaser for which he has to pay in any trading or business transaction. ... DISTINCTION BETWEEN TAX AND FEE - NO ‘QUID PRO QUO’ IN ‘LICENCE FEE’ THROUGH AUCTION OF ‘FIXED FEE’ ON VENDORS OF FOREIGN LIQUOR ... For understanding the points in controversy it would be enough to#HL_EN....
1984 0 Supreme(SC) 353 • India - Supreme Court
O.CHHINNAPPA REDDY, A.P.SEN, M.P.THAKKAR, E.S.VENKATARAMIAH
IN PUBLIC INTEREST AND PROTECTION OF FREE PRESS—TEST TO DETERMINE VALIDITY OF SUCH TAXING STATUTE —SUCH LEVY IS SUBJECT TO REVIEW ... PROTECTION OF FREE PRESS—TEST TO DETERMINE VALIDITY OF SUCH TAXING STATUTE-SUCH LEVY IS SUBJECT TO REVIEW ON THE LIGHT OF THE PROVISIONS ... IT IS THE DUTY OF COURT TO UPHOLD IT AND INVALIDATE ALL LAWS AND ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS INTERFERING WITH IT - A PIECE OF SUBORDINATE ... review by courts by the ....
1986 0 Supreme(SC) 349 • India - Supreme Court
K.N.SINGH, SABYASACHI MUKHARJEE
might be varied or modified - We are unable to sustain the judgment under appeal - In the premises it must be held that all licensees ... of the legislature, to be collected from the statute itself, or led to any manifest absurdity or repugnance, in which case language ... procedure prevalent in Bombay Small Cause Court which incidentally has exclusive jurisdiction under the Bombay Rent Act over these ... We do not sit as a committee of rev....
1973 0 Supreme(HP) 3 • India - Himachal Pradesh
R.S.PATHAK, CHET RAM THAKUR
Final Decision: The court ordered that the court fee payable for the review petition is as specified by Article 1(d)(iv) of ... Court Fees - Review Petition - The court determined the applicable court fee for a review petition of a judgment disposing of ... Issues: The main issue was the determination of the applicable court....
2009 0 Supreme(Ker) 574 • India - Kerala
P.R.RAMAN, T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
. 5 - An objection has been taken by the Registry regarding the court fee payable on the Review Petition and since the review petitioner ... Question was raised regarding the sufficiency of the court fee paid on the Review Petition - Full Bench examined the question whether ... fee on the memorandum of appeal and to furnish security for the costs of the responde....
1972 0 Supreme(Raj) 63 • India - Rajasthan
V.P.TYAGI
A review petition is an original petition and a fixed court-fee of Rs. 10/- is payable. ... A review petition is an original petition and a fixed court-fee of Rs. 10/- is payable. ... COURT FEES - Review petition - Court-fee payable - Article 11 (k) of Schedule II of the Ra....
2012 0 Supreme(Ker) 612 • India - Kerala
A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, PIUS C.KURIAKOSE
Kerala Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1959, Section 73A and Article 5 of Schedule 1 - For claiming the review petition the petitioner ... has to deposit the court fee -Review cannot be filed by the private party. ... According to the review petitioner, as the review petition arises out of such an appeal, no, court fee is payable on the review#HL_E....
1970 0 Supreme(AP) 193 • India - Andhra Pradesh
ALLADI KUPPUSWAMI, SAMBASIVA RAO
, no court-fee is payable on such a petition if the petitioner had been permitted to sue or appeal as a pauper. ... REVIEW PETITION - FILING IN FORMA PAUPERIS - MAINTAINABILITY - COURT-FEE - CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, ORDER 33, RULE 8; ORDER 44, RULE ... Finding of the Court: The court held that a review petition is a proceeding connected with the suit or #HL_START....
1972 0 Supreme(Raj) 63 • India - Rajasthan
V.P.TYAGI
according to the provisions of Article 5, Schedule I of the Rajas than Court-fees Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) application for review should bear one-half of the fee payable on the writ petition. ... Learned deputy Government Advocate urged that the the correct provision of the Court-fees Act would be Schedule I, Article 5 which provides that applications for review of judgment shall be presented in the Court on 1/2 of the fee#H....
2008 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 27 • India - Chhattisgarh High Court
*Jagdish Bhalla, Ag. C. J., Raosaheb Deshmukh, J.
Each one has his own cause of action arising out of the liability to pay tax individually and the petition of each one would be a separate and independent petition and each such person would be liable to pay legally payable Court fee on his petition. ... and to pay separate Court fee. ... For such common petition one Vakalatnama with one set of Court Fee stamp shall be sufficient. ... 3. ... it ....
2025 Supreme(Online)(MP) 9807 • India - IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
It is further argued that on account of above omissions, the petitioner was compelled to file present review petition and for the purpose of instituting the present review petition, petitioner was required to pay extra Court Fee in accordance to the provisions of the Court Fees Act, 1870. ... Accordingly, Court Fee deposited by the petitioner in this petition seeking review of order dated 17.11.20....
1981 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 21 • India - Kerala High Court
Subramonian Poti, Ag. C. J., *George Vadakkel, J.
The provision in S.12(1) of the Kerala Act that the decision of the court on the question of proper fee payable on the plaint given before registration of the plaint would be 'subject to review, further review and correction in the manner specified in the succeeding sub-sections', on the other hand, ... Act sub-s.(1) of S.11 of that Act corresponds to S.12(1) of the Kerala Act -- provides that 'the decision of the court under Clause (a) regarding the proper court #HL_....
2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 3255 • India - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ANIL K.NARENDRAN, MURALEE KRISHNA S.
It has to be noted that the Court fee payable in a suit is ad valorem. ... Petitions, any common question of law or fact would arise provided that each person joining in such Writ Petition shall pay the court fee payable under Art.11(4) of Schedule II of the Kerala Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, as if each of them had filed a separate Writ Petition.' ... In Narayana Shetty [2004 (3) KLT 596], this Court, while....
Filter by Legal Phrase
