SYNDICATE BANK Vs. S S PRINTERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE aforesaid three bank suits are placed before me in view of objection raised by the Prothonotary and Senior Master that the said suits embrace two or more distinct subjects having regard to the provisions of Section 18 of the Bombay Court Fees Act, 1959 ("act", for short), each such subject is liable to be charged separately and since the ad valorem fee for each subject is much more than Rs. 15,000/-, which is the maximum amount of Court fees payable on the plaint under proviso to Schedule 1, Article 1 of the Act, the plaintiffs are liable to pay Court fee of Rs. 15,000/- on each subject separately.

(2.) MR, Tulzapurkar, Ms. Rege and Mr. Patel, learned Advocates appearing for the plaintiffs, submitted that the objection raised by the Prothonotary and Senior Master is completely misconceived. According to the learned Advocates, the suits as framed did not embrace two or more distinct subjects as ruled by the Prothonotary and Senior Master and that the provisions of section 18 were not attracted. It was pointed out that each of the said suit is based upon a single equitable mortgage and, therefore, even though monies have been advanced by the banks under different facilities, the suits cannot be said to involve more than one cause of action or subject. The learned Advocates further urged that in any event the maximum Court fee payable on any plaint whether involving one or more subjects is Rs. 15,000/- and as the banks have paid the maximum Court fee on each of the said suit, objection raised by the Prothonotary and Senior Master must be rejected. On the other hand, it was urged by the learned Government Pleader that the suits in question involve different causes of action i. e. more than one subject and as such the Court fee is liable to be assessed separately for each subject under section 18 of the Act. The learned Government Pleader further urged that the expression "plaint/memorandum of Appeal" in Schedule 1 of the Act must necessarily mean an instrument relating to one cause of action and if there are several causes of action (subjects) incorporated in the plaint, each separate cause of action i. e. subject, with relief claimed would comprise and be treated as a separate plaint by itself and as such on each cause of action (subject) the maximum Court fee of Rs. 15,000/- will be payable. It was also urged by the learned Government Pleader that unless proviso to Schedule 1, Article 1 is not construed harmoniously with the provisions of section 18, there will be a conflict between the said proviso and section 18. The learned Government pleader thus fully supported the objection taken by the Prothonotary and Senior Master.

(3.) BEFORE dealing with rival contentions advanced at the bar, it would be proper to give a brief historical survey of Court fees legislation in this State. Prior to the enactment and coming into force of the Bombay Court Fees Act, 1959, Court-fees was a Central subject and in the Central enactment there was always a ceiling on the amount of Court fees payable. The Bombay Court Fees Act, 1959, however, as originally enacted, failed to contain provision imposing such ceiling, but this obviously was an accidental omission and by Act 16 of 1960 enacted within a few months a ceiling was introduced and such ceiling of the amount of Court fees remained operative upto 1974 when by an Amending Act which was published in the Official Gazette on December 12, 1974 the provision containing the ceiling came to be deleted. The said Amending Act was declared unconstitutional and struck down by this Court in (Indian Organic Chemicals Ltd. v. Chemtex Fibres Inc.)Bom. L. R. Vol. LXXXIII 406. Thereafter, by Amending Act, of 1984 the provision prescribing ceiling on the Court fees was reinserted on the statute book with effect from March 1, 1984.