KOCHAPPU Vs. SOMASUNDARAN CHETTIAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Most that could be said on the concept and content of court fee has been said by the Supreme Court in P.M. Ashwathanarayana Setty v. State of Karnataka, AIR 1989 SC 100 and in Secretary, Government of Madras, Home Department v. Zenith Lamp and Electrical Ltd., AIR 1973 S.C. 724. Much that could be done within the constricted frame work of a delicate financial situation appears to have been done by the State of Kerala on the basis of a report and recommendations from an expert committee chaired by a former Chief Justice of this Court Many of the professional organisations with effective and genuine academic and public interest, have through their seminars, symposia and resolutions contributed much of thought in the practical plane. One of such meaningful exercises in the State was the seminar on court fee organised at the meeting of the Bar Federation held at Thodupuzha in which the former Chief Justice of Delhi, Shri Rajinder Sachar, delivered a well studied speech. Ordinance No. 9 of 1990 promulgated by the State of Kerala in implementation of the report, gives substantial relief in very many areas as regards court fee. A total abolition may be the ideal; but like many ideals, it is not easily attainable. Levying the court fee almost up to the breaking point may be within the power of the Government as conceded by the Constitution and the Court. An exercise of power in that way may be permissible and legal but not protective or popular. The Government of the day, depending upon its own sense of direction and in tune with its perspective on the future, may arrive at any particular decision. The State of Kerala has arrived at one in that manner. The result was the Kerala Court Fees and Suits Valuation (Amendment) Ordinance, 1990. The Ordinance was duly replaced by the Kerala Court Fees and Suits Valuation (Amendment) Act, 1991 (Act 6/91). The disturbance of the statutory waters is likely to cause the ripples all around. One stone has now been thrown. The ripples are there. The court's pronouncement may set it at rest. Only for the time being. Other stones may be thrown and other ripples may arise. And the courts ultimately absorb them and keep everything calm and clear. The process continues, with fresh challenges and without monotony.

(2.) Seemingly short and simple is the query raised in relation to court fee in these cases. These appeals have been filed after the amendment had been effected to the Kerala Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1959. The Act 6/91 came into force on 5-12-1990. All the appeals are of a later date.

(3.) The provision for payment of court fees is contained in S.52. It reads: