Dev vs Chief Secretary, Government Of Kerala on 11 July, 2003
In the decision reported in AIR 1963 Gujarat 277 (Parshottam v. Motichand) a single Judge of the Gujarat High Court has observed as follows:
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 2 of 2 (0.20 seconds)Malathi Madhav Potbhare vs Madhv Gopal Potbhare And Anr. on 15 October, 1983
In support of her submission she relied up - on a decision of the Gujarat High Court in this case of Mistrv Parshottam Jinabhai v. Shah Motichand Chamji, . In that case the respondents had filed a suit to recover a sum of Rs. 4,35,000/- on the foot of a favour of the respondents. IN the suit a decree was passed the appellant for Rs.5,35,428. The appellant went in appeal from this decision asking for a credit of Rs.1,75,625. The appellant went in appeal from this decision asking for a credit of Rs. 1,75,625. The appellant was allowed to file an appeal in forma paupers. No court-fees were paid by the appellant before the filing of the appeal. Thereafter the dispute between the parties was settled and a consent decree was passed. At the point a question arose regarding payment of court-fees and it was held that in order to attract the applicability of 0.33. R. 11 it is not necessary that there should be an adjudication by the court or that the plaintiff should succeed or fail in the suit as a result of such adjudication. Such success or failure may also result from a consent decree. Accordingly the court held that the appellant had succeeded in the appeal to the extent of Rs. 86,000 by virtue of the consent decree and the appellant was directed to pay half the court fees on the said amount. The decision in that case can have no bearing on the issue in the present case.
1