THUNGABHADRA INDUSTRIES LTD., KURNOOL Vs. S. M. BALASUNDARAM, SOLE PROPRIETOR OF E. MUGESA MUDALIAR AND SON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These revision petitions raise an interesting question. The City Civil Court, Madras, returned two plaints for presentation to the proper court under Order 7, Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The plaints were re-presented to the Court of the Subordinate Judge at Kurnool, within the State of Andhra, subsequent to its formation. The question is whether the plaintiff is entitled to credit for the court-fee levied in the City Civil Court, Madras?

(2.) As the question is bare of authority so far as this Court is concerned and is of far reaching importance to the revenues of the State, notice was given to the learned Advocate General and I have had the benefit of his argument.

(3.) For a proper appreciation of the point arising for determination, it is necessary to refer to the legislative history of the law relating to the levy and collection of court-fees. Nearly ninety years ago, the Central Legislature enacted the Court Fees Act (VII of 1870), which extended to the whole of British India as it was then constituted The Central Act provided for a uniform levy of court-fees in all the provinces of British India. It was amended in its application to the various provinces by their Legislatures undertaking suitable simendments to the Central Act. With a view to meet the increased cost of administration by providing additional revenue, the principal Act was amended in its application to the Presidency of Madras by the Madras Court Fees (Amendment) Act, 1922.