Patna High Court
Sasibushan Mazumdar vs Manik Lal Chandra And Ors. on 12 January, 1928
Equivalent citations: 107IND. CAS.825
ORDER
1. The petitioner stamped his plaint with a Court-fee of Rs. 15 as in a declaratory suit, but he was ordered by the Subordinate Judge to pay an ad valorem Court-fee and thereupon he paid a Court fee Rs. 877-8-0. On appeal to this Court the Court fee on the memorandum of appeal was Rs. 15 and that was accepted as correct. We have referred to the pleadings in the suit and it seems clear that the suit was a declaratory suit and that the proper Court-fee was Rs. 15 only. The learned Advocate for the petitioner applies for a refund of the excess Court-fee paid under the orders of the Subordinate Judge. He refers to Section 13 of the Court Fees Act and contends that that section substantially applies, because, if he had not paid the ad valorem Court-fee as ordered by, the Court, his plaint would have been rejected. Whether the section applies or not, the case is one in which the Court has jurisdiction to act under Section 151 as was held in this Court in Chandra Hari Singh v. Tipan Prasad Singh46 Ind. Cas. 271 : 3 P.L.J. 452 : (1918) Pat. 273 See also In re Grant 14 W.R. 47 and Hari Har Guru v. Ananda Mahanty 20 Ind. Cas. 498 : 40 C. 365. On the authority of these decisions we direct that the Taxing Officer do issue the necessary certificate to enable the petitioner to apply to the Deputy Commissioner of Ranchi to obtain a refund of the excess Court-fee of Rs. 877-8-0.