- (1.) THIS is an appeal by claimant under Section 11 of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immoveable Property Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred as Act ). Short question is whether ad valorem court-fee as provided in Schedule I Article 1 of the Court-fee is payable or the same is payable under Schedule II Article 11 of the Court-fees Act.
(2.) IN a decision of learned Single Judge reported in 1965 ALJ p. 909 Bagh Raj v. Ram Ratan, it has already been laid down that on the memorandum of appeal claiming differential amount of compensation ad valorem Court-fee is payable under Article 1 Schedule I of the Court-fee Act. IN view of this decision which is binding on the Taxing Officer, there was no scope for any reference on the question of Court- fee. However, on a reference made by the Taxing Officer, appropriate bench hearing First Appeal has been nominated in absence of a Taxing Judge. Thus, we are to examine question of payment of Court- fee payable on the memorandum of appeal. Land of appellant was requisitioned under the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Properties Act. Therefore, it was compulsorily acquired. Compensation was offered at a rate which was not accepted by appellant who was demanding compensation at higher rate. In that view, an arbitrator was appointed as provided under the Act who made an award determining the prevailing market price. Appellant not being satisfied with the award, has preferred this appeal for getting higher compensation. Under Section 4 of the Court Fees Act, Court shall not receive a document on which proper fee as provided in Schedule I or Schedule II is not paid. Memorandum of appeal being a document proper fee is payable. Under Section 8 of the Court Fees Act, it is clarified that amount of lee pay able in memorandum of appeal in an appeal relating to compensation for acquisition of land under any Act is to be computed on the difference between the amount awarded and the amount claimed by the appellant. Question is whether ad-valorem Court-fee is payable under Article 1 Schedule I or fee as provided under Article 11 of Schedule II of the Court Fees Act is payable, since it is not disputed that in case Schedule 11 Article 11 is not attracted, residuary provision in Schedule I Article 1 would be attracted.
(3.) SRI Yatindra Singh, learned counsel for appellant submitted that an award by Arbitrator under the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Properties Act is neither a decree nor is an order having force of a decree. Therefore, Article 11 Schedule II of the Court Fees Act is directly attracted and Article 1 of Schedule I which is a residuary provision has no application. Reading Article 11 Schedule II it is clear that the provision relates to memorandum of appeal which is not against a decree or order not having a force of decree. 'decree' is defined in Code of Civil Procedure. As has been held in AIR 1976 SC 1503 (Dewan Brothers v. Central Bank Bombay) a decree is a formal expression of adjudication in suit in a Civil or Revenue Court. Order which has not force of a decree gets its meaning from the meaning of a decree. With development of Law, many adjudicating authorities were created under different statutes and proceedings before them are not suits in Civil Court or Revenue Court. Some statutes provide the decisions to have force of decree or deemed to be decree. In those statutes, the adjudicating authorities also pass orders against which right of appeal is created though they may not have force of decree. Schedule II Article 11 of Court Fees Act deal with memorandum of appeal which are against order which do not challenge decree or orders not having force of decree. This article cannot have wide scope. In any case, award of an arbitrator under Section 8 of the Requisitioning and Acquisition Act is not covered under Article 11 of Schedule II of the Court Fees Act.;