Anil Kumar Sahney and Another Vs Satish Kumar and Another

Supreme Court of India 23 Nov 1979 Civil Appeal 1142 Of 1979 (1980) 1 SCC 615 : (1980) ShimLC 131 : (1980) 12 UJ 139
Bench: Full Bench
Result Published

Judgement Snapshot

Case Number

Civil Appeal 1142 Of 1979

Hon'ble Bench

V. R. Krishna Iyer, J; R. S. Pathak, J; O. Chinnappa Reddy, J

Final Decision

Allowed

Judgement Text

Translate:

V.R. Krishna Iyer J.

1. Having heard Mr. Vohra and Mr. Bhandare, we do not think there is any need to change the earlier order passed by us where we had allowed the appeal.

2. The subject matter of the appeal is one of Court-fee and of delay in filing the appeal. But there is no room for doubt in the light of the happening as set out before us. Actually, the subject matter of the appeal to the High Court itself is only one of Court-fee. The plaint having been rejected on the ground that sufficient Court-fee was not paid, it is all a storm in a tea cup. Apart from that we have examined the matter and feel satisfied that the appeal to this Court should be allowed and the High Court directed to deal with the appeal denovo. The High Court will certainly remember that after all the matter is only one of Court fee and the appellant is willing to pay the alternative Court fee which is a larger sum. Even so the appeal will have to be disposed of by the High Court and so we remit the case back to the High Court directing it to the appeal on file and pass appropriate orders. If unlimited appellate jurisdiction has been vested in the District Court, the High Court will make the case cover to the District Judge''s Court which has jurisdiction over the subject matter.

From The Blog
Section 87A rebate STCG new tax regime
Nov
04
2025

Court News

Section 87A rebate STCG new tax regime
Read More
Power of Attorney validity India
Nov
04
2025

Court News

Power of Attorney validity India
Read More