VINDHYA BASANI Vs. JADAB SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question for consideration is as to whether the court-fee paid on the memorandum of appeal is sufficient.

(2.) The appellant is wife of the respondent. Land situate in village Jimjima belonged to the respondent. It had been assigned to the appellant in lieu of her maintenance. It was acquired by the Collector under the Land Acquisition Act. The compensation awarded by the learned Collector was apportioned between the respondent and the tenants of the said land. The appellant as the assignee of the said land claimed a right to be awarded the whole of the amount of compensation fixed by the learned Collector as the share of the respondent. That dispute was referred by the learned Collector to the Court under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act. The Court has apportioned the disputed amount between the parties in equal shares and it is against that order that an appeal has been filed. The appellant has paid a fixed court-fee of Rs. 15/- under Article 17(iii), Schedule II to the Court-fees Act as applicable to Himachal Pradesh. The office has reported that ad valorem court-fee is payable under Section 8 of the aforesaid Act.

(3.) On behalf of the appellant it has been contended that the order under appeal was in the nature of a declaratory decree and as the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Collector for the acquisition of the aforesaid land is not in dispute, Section 8 was not attracted and a fixed court-fee was payable under Article 17(iii), Schedule II, referred to above. Reliance in support of the aforesaid contention has been placed upon a ruling of the Rajasthan High Court, reported in AIR 1957 Raj 275, Hakim Martin De Silva v. Martin De Silva II.