G.C.Mathur, J. - (1.) THE appellant applied to this Court for the grant of a probate of a will left by his father. The probate was granted on May 4, 1961. The appellant paid a court-fee of Rs. 5,665.20 before the probate was granted. An order dated August 23, 1971, was received by the general attorney of the appellant from the Board of Revenue U. P. Allahabad, demanding payment of a deficiency of Rs. 3.952.50 in the court-fee in the probate case and directing that an application, a duly attested affidavit and the original probate "be sent to this office to enable us to grant a certificate under Section 19-E of the Court-fees Act." The appellant thereupon filed a writ petition in this Court, challenging the order dated August 23, 1971. The writ petition was dismissed by the learned Single Judge. Hence this appeal.
(2.) SRI B. C. Dey learned counsel for the appellant, has contended that the order of the Board of Revenue, demanding additional court-fee in the probate matter, is totally without jurisdiction and is illegal. The contention appears well founded. Court-fee on an application for probate is payable under Item 11 of Schedule I to the Court-fees Act. After an application for probate is filed. Sub-sections (1) and (2) of Section 19-H require that, if the application is filed in the High Court, notice shall be given to the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority and, if it is filed before any other court, notice shall be given to the Collector of the district. Subsection (3) of S. 19-H provides that, if the collector, after hearing the petitioner in the application for probate, is of opinion that the value of the property in the application for probate has been under estimated, he may require the petitioner to amend the valuation. Sub- section (4) then provides : "(4) If the petitioner does not amend the valuation to the satisfaction of the Collector, the Collector may move the Court, before which the application for probate or letters of administration was made, to hold an inquiry into the true value of the property : Provided that no such motion shall be made after the expiration of one year from the date of the exhibition of the inventory required by Section 317 of the Indian Succession Act." Sub-section (5) required the Court, when so moved, by the Collector, to hold an inquiry and to record a finding as to the true value of the property of the deceased. Sub-section (6) lays down the procedure for the inquiry. Sub-section (7) is in these words :- "(7) The finding of the Court recorded under sub-section (5) shall be final ; but shall not bar the entertainment and disposal by the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority of any application under Section 19-E." The scheme of Section 19-H thus is that, after notices have been sent to the Collector or to the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, the Collector may examine the valuation shown in the application for probate and, if he is of opinion that the value has been under estimated, he may require the petitioner to make the necessary amendment in the petition. If the amendment is not made, the Collector may move the Court, before which the petition is pending, and that Court will record a finding about the value of the property. The Collector can move the Court only within one year from the date of the exhibition of the inventory. After the expiry of this period, he cannot exercise this right. The finding of the Court regarding the value of the property is final. This finality does not bar the entertainment of an application under Section 19-E.
(3.) IN the present case, even though, admittedly, a notice under Section 19-H (2) was given to the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, the Collector did not move the High Court under sub-section (4) within the stipulated period of one year or at any time thereafter. The right of the Collector to move the Court under sub-section (4) is now barred. The learned Standing Counsel has sought to justify the impugned order under Sec. 19-E. If the order can be justified under Sec. 19-E, then it is immaterial whether the Collector did or did not move this Court under subsection (4) of S. 19-H.;