DARSANA BAI Vs. C. SAROJA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In Civil Revision Petition (NPD) No.1974 of 2003, in the matter of Darsana Bai (died) and others Vs.C.Saroja and others, one of us (K.RAVICHANDRABAABU, J) referred the following questions to a Larger Bench, having regard to the conflict of views rendered in the judgment in the matter of S.S.Durai Pandian & another v. S.S.Pandian, 2012 5 CTC 610 and in the matter of S.R.Narayana Ayyar Vs. Mavalathara Veerankutti & others, 1958 1 MadLJ 263 in respect of the Court Fee payable in an Appeal before the High Court when the suit was originally filed before the original side of the High Court and later transferred to a City Civil Court consequent upon enhancement of the pecuniary jurisdiction of the City Civil Court.

(2.) In the earlier judgment S.S.Durai Pandian and another v. S.S.Pandian, 2012 4 LW 89 cited , a Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court held that under Section 52 of the Tamil Nadu Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1955, Court fee payable in an Appeal shall be the Court fee that would be payable in the Court which passed the Judgment and Decree and interpreted Section 52 of the Tamil Nadu Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1955, holding that fee that would be payable in the Court of first instance would refer to the Court which passed the Judgment and decree in that suit and not the Court where the suit was originally filed and the Court fee that was paid at the time of filing the suit, cannot be taken into consideration while filing an Appeal, after the suit was transferred from the original side of the High Court to the City Civil Court.

(3.) A.S. SR.No.60263 of 2012 was filed against the Judgment and Decree in O.S.No.11042 of 2010 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No.II, Chennai, and while filing the Appeal, the appellant paid Court fee, which was paid in the suit at the time of filing of the suit in the Original Side of the High Court. An objection was raised by the Office regarding the Court Fees paid in the Memorandum of Appeal on the basis of the Judgment S.S.Durai Pandian and another v. S.S.Pandian, 2012 4 LW 89 cited . The learned counsel for the appellant in that Appeal answered the query raised by the Office directing the appellant to pay Court fee that would have been payable in the City Civil Court under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1955 and contended that the phrase, "Court of first instance" referred in Section 52 of the Tamil Nadu Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1955 means only the Court in which the suit was originally filed and therefore, while filing appeal under Section 52 of the Act, the same Court fee paid before the Original side of the High Court requires to be paid.