STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD AND ANOTHER Vs. S. RAMAMOORTHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This (sic) appeal comes before me on an objection raised by the office that the court fee paid on the memorandum of second appeal is inadequate. The suit was filed for a declaration that the notice of demand by the State Electricity Board is void, illegal and ultra vires and also for a permanent injunction restraining it from recovering from the plaintiff-appellant, Rs. 3026-06 paise, as per the said notice. In the trial court, the suit was valued at Rs. 600/- and a court fee of Rs. 67/- was paid thereon under Section 24 (b) of the Andhra Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act (VII of 1956), hereinafter died "the Act". The suit having been dismissed, the plaintiff preferred an appeal to the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Cuddapah who allowed the appeal and decreed the suit. The State Electricity Board has filed this appeal against the said decree and has valued the appeal memorandum at Rs.600/- as was done by the plaintiff in the Courts below.

(2.) The office raised an objection to the valuation stating that the proper provision of law applicable is not Section 24 (b) but Section 24 (d) and that the value is not Rs. 600/- but Rs. 3026-06 paise, the amount sought to be recovered by the issue of the demand notice. A notice was given by me to the learned Government Pleader and both the parties have made their submissions.

(3.) The scope and effect of Section 24 (d) of the Act have been the subject of a number of decisions. All the cases were recently reviewed by a Bench of this Court consisting of Basi Reddy and Vaidya, JJ. in C.C.C.A.No.38 of 1962. The facts in that case are as follows: