KALLINGRAO Vs. FAKIRAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of a suit for redemption of mortgage property. By the preliminary decree, the plaintiff was directed to deposit Rs.2,033 within six months thereof. The plaintiff deposited Rs.2,000 within the time stipulated and the balance of Rs.33 after that period. While depqsiting the balance, he had made an application under Or.34, R.8 CPC for passing the final decree, evidently requesting the Court to accept the belated payment. The Court while accepting the said deposit made a final decree. Against that decree, the defendant filed an appeal before the Court of the Civil Judge, Gadag, on a court-fee stamp of Re.1. The said appeal was eventually dismissed holding that the final decree passed by the trial Court was legal.

(2.) The defendant being aggrieved, has come up in Second Appeal. He has paid a Court fee of Rs.10 on the memorandum of appeal under Art.3(iii) (1) (a) of Sch.II of the Karnataka Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1958 (called shortly 'the Act'). The Office has raised an objection stating that the fee paid is not sufficient and the appellant ought to pay Court fee as provided under S.32(8) read with S.49 of the Act. Counsel on both sides have ably assisted me to appreciate the point in controversy.

(3.) Mr. Venkatachala, learned II Addl Govt Advocate, in support of the Office objection urged that Art.S(iii) (1) (a) of the Act is not attracted to the case on hand, since- the appeal arises out of a suit for redemption, for which a special provision is made under the Act. It is true that 3.32(8.) of the Act provides for the payment of Court fee in a suit for redemption. It reads :