KALI GOPAL CHATTERJEE Vs. T BANERJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This fiscal matter has been referred to me, for final decision, under Sec-tion 5 of the Court-Fees Act 7 of 1876.

(2.) The facts which have led up to this reference need not be referred to further than as fellows: The Special Land Acquisition Judge, 24-Parganas, seized of a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act 1 of 1894, rejects the claim of the appellant to the entire sum of Rs. 23, 912. 37 paise, the compensation, awarded by the Land Acq-uisition Collector, for compulsory acquisition, for public purpose, of a certain land in mouza Basudevpore, within the jurisdiction of Baranagar police-station. The claim, so rejected, was on the foot of a purchase from one Harinandan Ram, said to be in possession of the acquisitioned land, as an under raiyat. Hence the appeal, valued at Rs. 23, 912. 37 paise, but stamped with a court-fee of Rs. 5 only. The Stamp Reporter, an officer whose duty it is to see that proper fee is paid, insists on ad valorem court-fees under schedule 1 to the Court-Fees Act. That comes to Rs. 1,320 minus Rs. 5 put in already. The appellant contends however that a fixed court-fee is leviable under schedule II, Article 11, prescribing a fee of Rs. 5, when the appeal is not from a decree or an order having the force of a decree, or at best, under Article 17 (iii), prescribing a fee of Rs. 20, when the object of the memorandum of appeal is to obtain a declaratory decree, with no prayer for a consequential relief.

(3.) Herein lies the difference between the Stamp Reporter and the appellant.