SUKHDEO MOTIRAM DIKE Vs. GOVINDA HARI MANKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant in First Appeal No. 139 of 1976 has preferred this application for review of the decision of the Taxing Officer under Section 5(2) of the Bombay Court Fees Act, 1959. The said appeal was filed by the appellant being aggrieved by the Civil Judge (Senior Division) Akola in Special Civil Suit No. 13 of 1974 on 1-7-1976. The said appeal, after notice, on admission, to the respondents (present N. As.) was dismissed in motion by an order dated 5th July, 1977. Against that order, the appellant, present applicant, preferred a review application to this Court and affixed a five rupees stamp thereon. An office objection was raised that the applicant is liable to pay court fee under Schedule I, Article 8 as it is an application for review of Judgment and decree of this Court. It was contended before the Taxing Officer that in dismissing the appeal in limine, this Court has not passed any decree and what was sought to be revised was an order and not a judgment resulting in a decree. It was contended that the case is covered by Schedule 2, Article 1 (f) (iii) which is a residuary article. The Taxing Officer overruled the objection and held that the applicant will have to pay ad valorem court fee under Article 8, Schedule I of the Court Fees Act. It is this order, which is sought to be revised in this Civil Revision Application.

(2.) The order sought to be reviewed was passed under Order 41, Rule 11 (1). No reasons were given and the first appeal was disposed of by the High Court by a cryptic one worded order "dismissed".

(3.) The application for review is filed under Order 47, Rule 1 (1) which reads as follows :-