SRI BALUSU VENKAIAH & ORS. Vs. FOREST DEPARTMENT, ANDHRA PRADESH
LAWS(APH)-1969-12-30
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Decided on December 12,1969

Sri Balusu Venkaiah And Ors. Appellant
VERSUS
Forest Department, Andhra Pradesh Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Vidya, J. - (1.)These C. R. Ps. raise the question as to the amount of Court fee payable on appeals preferred under Sec. 13 of the A. P. Forest Act to the District Cour.
(2.)The petitioners-appellants in both the cases paid a court fee of Rs. 3.00 under Art. 3 (1) of Schedule II of A. P. Court Fees & Suits Valuation Act, (hereinafter referred to as the Court Fee Act.) On objection the Court held that it is a matter covered by Sec. 49 of the Court Fee Act. The appellants then advanced the argument that if section 49 of the Court Fee Act is held applicable, the court of first instance will be the court of Forest Officer before whom the application under section 10 of the Forest Act was filed and disposed of. If that is held to be the court of first instance, the court fee that was paid on the application before that officer will be the court fee payable under section 49 of the Court Fee Act also. In that event the court fee of Rs. 1/- will become payable. On this objection of the petitioners, the court held that the court fee should be paid as if the impugned orders and decrees were passed in suits. For this proposition the court relied on Kamaraja Vs. Secretary of State for India I.L.R. 8 Mad. 22 . It is this decision which is assailed before me by the petitioners.
(3.)Shri N. C. V. Ramanujachari, the learned counsel for the petitioners contends that Kamaraja Vs. Secretary of State For India I.L.R. 8 Mad. 22 is not applicable to the facts of the case, because that case was decided on the provisions of the Court Fees Act priority the enactment of Forest Act in Madras. Further the provisions interpreted by the court then are not in pari materia with the provisions of Art. 3 of Schedule II of the present Act. I see force in this contention. The Court has specifically held in this case that the Court Fee Act was enacted before enactment of the Madras Forest Act and therefore, no specific provision was to be found in the Court Fee Act regarding the appeals preferred under the Forest Act. There is a difference of language in Art. 17 (vi) of Schedule II of the Court Fee Act and Art. 3 (i) of Schedule II of the Court Fee Act. In my opinion the aforesaid decision cannot be applied to the present case.
;


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