STATE OF KERALA Vs. CHANDRADASS BUTT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A Division Bench of this court consisting of Raghavan, C. J. and one of us disposed of by a common judgment four appeals, A. S. Nos. 52 and 464 of 1969 and 361 and 363 of 1970. These appeals arose out of three proceedings before the Subordinate Judge of Cochin, two Original Petitions under the Hindu Marriage Act; and a suit for maintenance. One Original Petition was to declare the marriage between the parties a nullity or in the alternative, if the marriage is found valid, for granting a decree for judicial separation. The other Original Petition was for a decree for judicial separation on the ground of desertion. The suit was for past and future maintenance, for return of streedhanam, ornaments and movables. The Original Petitions were dismissed by the Trial Court. In the suit for maintenance, a decree was granted for past and future maintenance at the rate of Rs. 125 per mensem. The other prayers in the suit were not granted. Aggrieved parties fled the above mentioned appeals and cross appeal against the judgment and decrees of the Subordinate Judge. This court dismissed all the appeals but allowed the cross appeal in part. In A. S. No. 52 of 1969 this court directed the appellant to pay the costs of the respondents, one set. In A. S. No. 464 of 1969 the 1st respondent wife succeeded and therefore she was awarded costs but since she succeeded only in part in the cross appeal, there was no direction regarding costs in the cross appeal. The present application, at the instance of the State, is for an amendment of the judgment, to include a direction, for realisation by the State, of the court fee of Rs. 365 payable in the memorandum of cross appeal. This petition is a consequence of the fact that the cross objection was filed in forma pauperis by the wife.

(2.) The question is whether such a direction can be made by this court now.

(3.) The relevant provision of law regarding direction for court fee in matters arising from pauper proceedings is contained in O.33, R.10 and 12 C.P.C. We shall read the two rules for a proper appreciation of the question at issue: