SIDESHWARI PROSAD Vs. RAM KUMAR RAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On 22 December, 1925, a Full Bench of this Court in Ram Golam v. Chintaman Singh AIR 1926 Pat 218 decided that where the amount of mesne profits accruing pendente lite was left to be ascertained in the course of execution of the decree, no court-fee was payable on the claim until the amount actually due had been ascertained. Following this decision, the Taxing Judge decided on 14th July 1926 that ad valorem court-fee should not be levied on appeals to this Court from decisions determining the amount of mesne profits. His decision was reported as Sheodhin Singh V/s. Norangi Lal Ram Marwad (1926) 129 IC 662.

(2.) On 10 March 1932, the question of whether ad valorem court-fee was payable on such appeals came before a Division Bench of this Court in Kedar Nath Goenka V/s. Chandra Maulashwar Prasad Singh AIR 1932 Pat 228, when it was decided that ad valorem court-fee was payable on such a memorandum of appeal.

(3.) On a question arising between, the Stamp Reporter and an appellant after this decision, as to whether ad valorem court-fee was payable or not, the matter was referred to me as Taxing Judge, whose decision, of 18 November 1932, in Dhanukdhari Prasad Pandey V/s. Ramadhikari Missir AIR 1933 Pat 81 was that ad valorem court-fee was payable on the memorandum of appeal.