Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

3. The learned senior counsel for the revision petitioner contends that the order of the trial Court in dismissing I.A.No.130 of 2008 is contrary to law and that the trial Court has failed to note that it erred in law in extending the time for payment of Court Fee without any application being filed for such extension and moreover the extension of time for payment of Court Fee is not an automatic and that when the payment of Court Fee of paltry sum of Rs.100/- has been paid then admittedly, huge amount of deficit Court Fee has to be paid and this itself shows lack of bonafide on behalf of the plaintiffs and moreover, the time granted by the trial Court to pay deficit Court Fee has expired during vacation and hence the deficit Court Fee ought to have been paid on the reopening date and whereas it has been paid only long after that an that too without a petition for extension of time under Section 149 of CPC and that the trial Court has proceeded on the assumption that there has been delay of 37 days only but it has failed to take into account of the fact that the issue is not about the number of days but whether without an application for extension, the Court can extend the time in this regard and in any event on the date when the deficit Court Fee has been paid, the claim or right itself has become statutorily barred and therefore prays for allowing this civil revision petition in the interest of justice.

29. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner submits that the cause of action is dated 16.10.1993 within six months suit is to be filed and the same has expired on 16.4.1994 and the date of reopening of the Court, after summer recess is on 6.6.1994 and that on 7.4.1994 only the Court fee of Rs.100/- has been paid and that the plaint has been returned on 15.4.1994 granting one months' time and that the plaint has been represented on 28.4.1994 after rectification of defects, but for payment of Court Fee the plaint has been returned granting time for payment of deficit Court Fee till 22.6.1994 and that when deficit court fee has been paid on 22.6.1994, the limitation period is over and therefore, the crucial issue is whether without filing an application praying permission of the Court to accept the Court fee, can the Court accept the payment of deficit Court fee and contends that the application is very much necessary under Section 149 of CPC, without which the Court cannot receive the deficit court fee and condone the delay thereto.

30. The learned counsel for the respondents submits that originally the Court fee of Rs.100/- has been paid on the plaint and an application has been filed before the lower Court under Section o149 of CPC praying time for payment of balance of Court fee and the same has been allowed on 15.4.1994 granting a month's time to pay the deficit Court fee less Rs.100/- already paid and that since the one month time expires on 15.5.1994 during the summer recess and that the Court is to re-open during the first week of June 1994 and further that the plaint has been returned for various defects to be complied with, including the payment of deficit court fee and that without the time granted the plaint has been re-presented on 28.4.1994 and necessary entry 8480 has been made in the Court Fee Register and after necessary return of the plaint and after attending the rectification of defects, the plaint has been re-presented on 22.6.1994 with an endorsement 'rectifying defects' including the payment of balance of Court fee having been paid along with the plaint and therefore, the trial Court has accepted the balance of deficit Court fee for excusing the delay, if any under its vested power and that the plaint has been re-presented on 13.7.1994, 2.8.1994, 23.8.1994, 5.9.1994 and finally 13.9.1994 before the numbering of the suit and therefore the civil revision petition has to be dismissed. As a matter of fact, the plaint has been registered as suit on 13.9.1994.

32.As far as the present case is concerned, the deficit Court Fee of Rs.2,90,527/- has been paid on 22.6.1994. However, no application has been filed before the trial Court to accept the payment of deficit Court Fee. But the trial Court has accepted the payment of deficit Court Fee mentioned supra. In the first page of the Court Fee stamp paper of Rs.3000/- value, stretched with the plaint, there is an endorsement in red ink by the Sheristadar of the Sub Court, Erode to the effect that DCF paid Rs.2,90,527/- and initialled putting the date as 22.06.1994 by him.