SATTI MUTYALAMMA AND ORS. Vs. VINJAMURI KRISHNAMMA
LAWS(MAD)-1944-12-11
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Decided on December 15,1944

Satti Mutyalamma And Ors. Appellant
VERSUS
VINJAMURI KRISHNAMMA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Kuppuswami Ayyar, J. - (1.) THE only point urged in these three appeals is about the order of the learned Subordinate Judge refusing to refund the court -fees paid on the appeal memoranda in the lower appellate Court on the ground that these are not suitable cases. The learned Judge has remanded all the three suits for taking fresh evidence and disposal. Under Section 13 of the Court -Fees Act, the Court has no discretion in the matter and is bound to refund the court -fees when a remand is made on any of the grounds mentioned in Section 351 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Under Section 8 of the General Clauses Act, when any section or enactment is repealed and is re -enacted either with or without modifications, then the reference must be considered to have been made to the subsequent section that has been enacted. Reading Section 13 by substituting Order 41, Rule 23 for Section 351. of the Civil. Procedure Code of 1859, which has been repealed the Judge had no discretion and was bound to refund the court -fee paid on the appeal memoranda. The order of the learned Subordinate Judge refusing to refund the court -fees is set aside and there will be instead a direction for refund of court -fees on the memorandum of appeal in the lower appellate Court in all the three appeals.
(2.) THE other point is not pressed and the three appeals to that extent are dismissed without costs.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.