DEN NETWORKS LIMITED PETITIONER Vs. MULTI VISION NETWORK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MR . Navin Chawla, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Judgment Debtor would contend that having regard to the decision of this Tribunal in Tata Teleservices Ltd. (Maharashtra) Vs. Union of India (Petition No.12 of 2002), this Tribunal having held that no ad -valorem Court Fee can be levied by this Tribunal on its administrative side, the Judgment Debtor could not have been saddled with any costs/including the amount of Court Fee.

(2.) IT is true that in the aforementioned judgment, this Tribunal has held that no ad -valorem Court Fee could be levied by this Tribunal by an administrative order. It is, however, not in dispute that the decree -holder had paid ad -valorem Court Fee in terms of the rules framed by this Tribunal. The two petitions filed by the decree holder herein have been allowed with costs. The decrees have been prepared accordingly.

(3.) THE decree holder, in our opinion, is entitled to execute the decree as it stands. The Judgment Debtor, in our considered opinion, cannot say that it would not pay a part of the decree only because in another matter ad -valorem Court Fee has been found to be not payable.