Skip to content


Mannem Borramma Vs. Mannem Rukminamma - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtAndhra Pradesh High Court
Decided On
Case NumberCivil Misc. Petn. (S.R.) No. 22761 of 1971
Judge
Reported inAIR1973AP98
ActsCode of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Sections 151; Andhra Pradesh Court-fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1956 - Sections 63
AppellantMannem Borramma
RespondentMannem Rukminamma
Advocates:Govt. Pleader;N. Ramachandra Rao, Adv.
Excerpt:
.....settled principles governing determination of compensation has been given a go-bye. compensation of rs.4,15,150/- awarded by the tribunal was enhanced to rs.8,20,000/-. - 2. it is now well settled that this court has no power to order refund of court-fees in cases which are outside the purview of the provisions of the andhra pradesh court-fees and suits valuation act.order1. this is a petition for refund of the court-fees paid on the memorandum of cross-objections filed in a.s.no. 20/70 on the ground that the main appeal itself has been withdrawn.2. it is now well settled that this court has no power to order refund of court-fees in cases which are outside the purview of the provisions of the andhra pradesh court-fees and suits valuation act. the grounds mentioned in the affidavit do not come within the ambit of the provisions of section 63 of the court-fees act. the inherent powers which this court can exercise under section 151. civil p.c., in respect of refund of court-fees are strictly limited to such of the case as mentioned in inre chidambaram chettiar. air 1934 mad 566. the court can order refund of court - fees under section 151, civil p.c.,.....
Judgment:
ORDER

1. This is a petition for refund of the court-fees paid on the memorandum of cross-objections filed in A.S.No. 20/70 on the ground that the main appeal itself has been withdrawn.

2. It is now well settled that this Court has no power to order refund of court-fees in cases which are outside the purview of the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Court-fees and Suits Valuation Act. The grounds mentioned in the affidavit do not come within the ambit of the provisions of Section 63 of the Court-fees Act. The inherent powers which this court can exercise under Section 151. Civil P.C., in respect of refund of Court-fees are strictly limited to such of the case as mentioned in Inre Chidambaram Chettiar. AIR 1934 Mad 566. The Court can order refund of Court - fees under Section 151, Civil P.C., where there has been an excess payment made by mistake or where on account of the mistake of the Court, a party has been compelled to pay Court -fees either fully or in part. A part from these instances, the Court has no power to order refund under Section 151, Civil P.C., The present case falls within the scope of the decision in AIR 1934 Mad 566 and therefore, this court has no power to grant a certificate for refund of the Court-fees in as much as the petitioner did not make any excess payment of court-fees by mistake nor was he compelled to pay court-fees on account of the mistake of the Court. This is a case where the petitioner wanted to file cross-objections and had done so by affixing the proper court-fee stamps but due to compromise with the other side, it appears the main appeal had been withdrawn rendering the cross-objections unnecessary.

3. Hence, the prayer to grant a certificate for refund of the court-fees paid on the memorandum of cross-objections is rejected. However, since the court-fee stamps are getting spoiled without being used for purposes of cross-objections the petitioner's remedy. If any is not by way of a petition of this nature but to apply to Government for refund after the usual deductions in respect of spoiled stamp papers. As requested by the petitioner for this purpose alone a certificate will be granted to the petitioner that the cross-objections was not numbered or heard by this Court that the cross-objections has been stamped with a court-fee of Rupees 100/- and that the court-fee stamps have been defaced by the Office of the High Court in ht usual routine. The Government may pass such orders as it deems fit after perusing this certificate. The memorandum of cross-objections which has now become unnecessary and need not be retained in this Court will be returned to the petitioner for prosecuting his application with the Government, if so advised.

4. Petition rejected.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //