JOSE Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This case has come up before us, because, the Registry noted a defect that sufficient court fee has not been paid on this appeal and the counsel appearing for the appellant replied that no ad velorem court fee need be paid on this appeal. It is on that point, the matter is posted before us.

(2.) It is submitted that a claim statement has been filed before the Collector, which, in terms of Rule 378(3) of the Civil Rules of Practice, shall have to be taken as a plaint. In terms of Section 72(xviii) of the Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, an application for compensation is not chargeable to any court fee. When the reference application which is treated as plaint is thus not chargeable to court fee, necessarily, an appeal from the judgment answering the reference shall also not be chargeable to court fee, it is contended. Hence, it is submitted that a reading of Sections 51 and 52 of the Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act also makes it clear that no court fee is payable on an appeal, under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, as no court fee is payable "in the court of first instance".

(3.) It has been held by the Full Bench in the decision reported in Balakrishnan Nambiyar v. Madhavan and Ors. (1978 KLT 843):