MUNNA LAL Vs. ABIR CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application for refund of court-fee. The circumstances in which it has arisen are not in dispute. The applicants filed a First Appeal in this Court. They valued it at Rs. 7,500/- and paid a court-fee of Rs. 710/-. The decree against which the appeal has been filed was a conditional decree and it had been provided in it that if the plaintiffs-made any default in making a certain payment within the time allowed the suit shall stand dismissed. After the appeal had been filed in this Court the plaintiffs made a default which resulted in the automatic dismissal of the suit. The appeal filed by the defendants-appellants in this Court against the decree thus became infructuous and the appellants applied for the withdrawal of the same before it was formally admitted by this Court. This Court permitted the appeal to be withdrawn. The appellants then made the application which has been referred to this Full Bench for disposal. They prayed in it that the court-fee which they had paid on their appeal may be refunded. The matter came up before a Division Bench for disposal. There it was conceded that the refund could not be claimed under any of the provisions of the Court-fees Act. It was however urged on the basis of the cases reported in Mohammad Sadiq Ali Khan v. Ali Abbas, AIR 1933 Oudh 170(1) (A) and Munnalal v. Ram Chandra, AIR 1930 All 471(1) (B) that in the circumstances of the case the refund could be allowed in exercise of the inherent powers of the Court preserved under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The Division Bench noticed that the correctness of the decisions relied upon had been doubted in the case of Om Prakash Gupta v. United Provinces, AIR 1951 All 205 (C) and feeling that a larger Bench should be constituted for deciding the application referred it to a Full Bench.

(2.) The question to be decided therefore is:

(3.) Court-fee is required to be paid under the provisions of the Court-Fees Act which clearly provide that unless the necessary court-fee has been paid no document o the kind chargeable with court-fee shall be filed, exhibited or recorded in any court of justice. No document in respect of which court fee should be paid but has not been paid can therefore be of any validity and no court can act upon it. The appellants paid the court-fee which they now want to be refunded at the time when they filed their appeal because they knew that the appeal would not be entertained or acted upon unless the court-fee was paid. The amount which they paid was that prescribed by the Court Fees Act. They deliberately and voluntarily paid the same. There are provisions in the Court-fees Act under which a refund of court-fee can he allowed. It is not necessary to refer to them because it is conceded, that the appellants' case does not fall under any of those provisions. The appellants therefore seek to invoke the inherent powers of this Court and urge that in the exercise of that power this Court should allow refund of the court-fee which they paid because the appeal had to be withdrawn in circumstances beyond their control at a very early stage before it was even admitted by this Court. They therefore urge that they should not be made to suffer loss of the amount, because they have not been at fault in any manner.