FEDERAL BANK LIMITED Vs. JOHN THOMAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An interesting question regarding payment of Court fee on counter claims filed before the Debt Recovery Tribunal during the interregnum between 17-1-2000, which is the date of troduction of sub-section (8) in Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (for short 'the Act'), allowing filing of counter claims by defendants and 21-1-2003. which is the date of amendment of Rule 7 of the Debt Recovery Tribunal (Procedure) Rules. 1993 (for short 'the Rules') prescribing Court fee for application to counter claim arises in this case. The facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal which lie in a very narrow compass, are as follows.

(2.) The appellant-Federal Bank filed O.A. No. 161/2002 before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Ernakulam for recovery of certain amounts due from the 1st respondent herein. On 22-7-2002. the 1st respondent filed a counter claim raising money claims against the Bank in accordance* with Section 19 (8) of the Act. At that time, the Rules did not contain any specific provision for payment of Court fee on counter claims. With effect from 21-1-2003, Rule 7 of the Rules was substituted prescribing Court fee for counter claims also. On 19-10-2004, the Debt Recovery Tribunal passed an order directing the 1st respondent herein to pay Court fee on the counter claim. Challenging the said order, the 1st respondent filed W.P. (C) No. 34318/2004. A learned single Judge of this Court allowed the writ petition and held that no Court fee is payable in respect of counter claims filed before 21-1-2003, i.e. the date of amendment of Rule 7 of the Rules. This Judgment is under challenge in this writ appeal at the instance of the Bank.

(3.) The appellant-Bank raises three contentions in this appeal.