Skip to content


Samineni Bhadrayya Vs. Sandi Chinna Subbaiah - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtAndhra Pradesh High Court
Decided On
Case NumberA.A.A.O. No. 101 of 1956
Judge
Reported inAIR1959AP279
ActsAndhra Pradesh High Court Appellate Side Rules - Rule 61; States Reorganisation Act, 1956 - Sections 119 and 120
AppellantSamineni Bhadrayya
RespondentSandi Chinna Subbaiah
Appellant AdvocateB.V. Subbarayudu and ;B.V. Narasimham, Advs.
Respondent Advocate2nd Government Pleader
Excerpt:
.....process fee rules - sections 119 and 120 of states reorganisation act, 1956 and rule 61 of andhra pradesh high court appellate side rules - issue whether process fee payable for service of notice on respondent is governed by defunct hyderabad high court rules or andhra pradesh high court - sections 119 and 120 conferred power on state legislature or any other competent authority to alter laws - in regard to rules for process fee, high court alone was competent authority to make alteration or addition in existing rules - high court promulgated new rules under andhra pradesh high court appellate side rules after state's reorganisation. - - 1t was admitted on 7-12-1956 and steps were taken to serve the sole respondent on 8-7-1958. in such a situation, this apppeal as well as all..........the one governed by the rules framed by the erstwhile hyderabad high court or those of the andhra pradesh high court. so far as the case on hand is concerned, it does not present any difficulty for the reason that the appeal itself was filed after 1-11-1956 i.e., a few days after the appellate side rules were promulgated by virtue of the powers conferred by the enactments mentioned in schedule i thereto and all other powers thereunto enabling. 1t was admitted on 7-12-1956 and steps were taken to serve the sole respondent on 8-7-1958. in such a situation, this apppeal as well as all proceedings arising therefrom are governed only by the appellate side made after 1-11-1958.2. but the vital question is whether these rules would apply to appeals filed before the formation of the andnra.....
Judgment:

1. The problem posed here is whether the process fee payable for service of notice on the respondent is the one governed by the rules framed by the erstwhile Hyderabad High Court or those of the Andhra Pradesh High Court. So far as the case on hand is concerned, it does not present any difficulty for the reason that the appeal itself was filed after 1-11-1956 i.e., a few days after the Appellate Side Rules were promulgated by virtue of the powers conferred by the enactments mentioned in Schedule I thereto and all other powers thereunto enabling. 1t was admitted on 7-12-1956 and steps were taken to serve the sole respondent on 8-7-1958. In such a situation, this apppeal as well as all proceedings arising therefrom are governed only by the appellate Side made after 1-11-1958.

2. But the vital question is whether these rules would apply to appeals filed before the formation of the Andnra Pradesh High Court and during the existence of the erstwhile Hyderabad High Court. It is argued, by the learned Covernment Pleader that by reason of Section 119 of the States Reorganisation Act, 1956, it is the old law that prevails which, in this context, means the rules made ay the Hyderabad High Court. Those rules, prescribe a fee of Rs. 4/- for every process issued by that High Court for serving and executing processes, Section 119 of the Stated Reorganisation Act provides :

'The provisions of Part II shall not be deemed to have effected any change in the territories to which any law in force immediately before the references in any such law to an existing state shall, until otherwise provided by a competent Legislature or other competent authority, bo construed as meaning the territories within the State immediately before the appointed day.'

Section 120 also may be noticed :

'for the purpose of facilitating the application for any law in relation to any of the States formed or territorially altered by the provisions of Part II, the appropriate Government may, before the expiration of the one year from the appointed day by order make such adaptation and modification of the law, whether by way of repeal or amendment, as may be necessary or expedient, and thereupon every such law shall have effect subject to the adaptations and amended by a competent Legislature or other competent authority.'

3. These two sections have conferred power not only upon the State Legislatures to niter laws but also on any other competent authority. It cannot he disputed that so far as the rules in regard to the process-fee are concerned, it is the High Court that is the competent authority to make, alter or add to any of the rules existing prior to the Reorganisation of States. Undoubtedly, this Court has promulgated rules in regard to this matter after 1-11-1956.

'The following fees shall be chargeable for serving and executing processes issued by High Court of Andhra Pradesh in its Appellate jurisdiction.'

The schedule to the rules provides Rs. 1-7-0 by way of fees for serving and executing processes to he issued by tile High Court of Andhra Pradesh in its appellate jurisdiction. It takes in all proceedings in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh and in regard to which processes were sought to be issued after the making of these rules irrespective of the time at which the appeals were filed.

The material time is the time at which service is sought to be effected i.e., when the High Court is required to serve and execute the processes in its appellate jurisdiction. In these circumstances, it is Rule 61 of the Appellate Side Rules that is applicable to all the processes that are to issue from this Court in its appellate side jurisdiction after 1-11-1956 and this requirement is complied with it a Court fee of Rs. 1-7-0 per notice is paid.


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