AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
T.N. Vallinayagam, J.—Heard Mr. Mohd. Shafiuddin, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. Jeevan, learned Counsel for the Respondent.
The Civil Revision Petition is against the order directing payment of Court fee in respect of the appeal filed under the provisions of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971. The District Judge before whom the appeal was filed against the order of eviction made by the Estate Officer, under the provisions of the above Act, has held that the Court fee is payable on the value of the property.
In the provisions under Schedule 2 of the Karnataka Court Fee Act, the following provision is made:
3) Memorandum of appeal (from a decision, award of order) inclusive of an order determining any question u/s 47 or Section 144 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and not otherwise provided for when prevented.
(i) to any Court other than the High Court or any executive Officer (Four Rs.)
(ii) the Karnataka Revenue Appellate Tribunal (or the Co- operative Appellate Tribunal) (Eight Rs.)
(iii) to the High Court (Fifteen Rs.)
(1) Where an order was passed by a Subordinate Court or other authority
(a) if the order relates to a suit or proceeding, the value of which exceeds one thousand Rs. (Fifteen Rs.)
(b) in any other case Eight Rs.
The above appeal comes under the category of in appeal payable under Rs. 8/-. The view of the Court below is therefore, wrong and not sustainable. Consequently, the Court fee paid by the appellant in appeal is held to be correct and Civil Revision Petition is allowed.