RAJAKUMAR BHAGWATASARAN Vs. COLLECTOR OF CHENNAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner herein seeks for issuance of a writ of certiorari to call for the records pertaining to the proceedings of the first Respondent/District Collector, Chennai, bearing No. B3/8276/97, dated 26.11.2004, in and by which, the petitoner was directed to pay arrears of court fee to the tune of Rs. 16,538/- in respect of O.S. Nos. 4021 & 5170 of 1969 on the file of the City Civil Court, Madras, and C.A. No. 1802 of 1974 and C.S. No. 127 of 1970 before the High Court, Madras, within 15 days from the date of the impugned order with a default clause that failure would result in further action under the Tamil Nadu Revenue Recovery Act (in short the 'Act') to recover the amount, and to quash the same.

(2.) For better appreciation of the case, the backdrop in which the present petition came to be filed needs to be detailed below in brief:

(3.) The Petitioner, a practising Advocate and appearing as party-in-person, at the foremost, submitted that the Central Act viz., Court Fees Act, 1870, was unknown to the framers of the Madras Revenue Recovery Act, 1864 and that the amending Act XV of 1939 does not mention about court-fees. According to him, the Amendment Act XXIV of 1942 introduced latter part into Rule 14 of Order XXXIII Code of Code of Civil Procedure without any corresponding provision in the Revenue Recovery Act; therefore, the provision to the effect that the Collector without prejudice to any other mode of recovery, may recover the amount of court-fees specified therein from the person or property liable for payment as if it were an arrear of land revenue, having become repugnant under Article 13 of the Constitution, the Collector has no jurisdiction or authority to draw or frame proceedings and pass the impugned order.