LexThe Court-Fee ACT, 1870
Delhi · state statute
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this act THE COURT-FEES ACT,1870 1
INTRODUCTION
With the establishment of Courts a system was evolved for the payment of fees for
adjudication of the cases. The rates of stamp fees leviable in courts and offices
established beyond the local limits of the ordinary original civil jurisdiction of the High
Courts of Judicature at Fort William, Madras and Bombay and in proceedings on the
appellate side of, High Courts, were fixed by Act XXVI of 1867 which were, to the great
extent, tentative. Within a span of about two years the experience gained of their wor king
seemed to be conclusive as to their repressive effect on the general litigation of the
country. It was thought necessary to make a general reduction in the rates on the
institution of civil suits, and to revert to the principle of maximum fee which ob tained under
the former law. It was proposed to reduce the valuation for the computation of the fee
leviable on suits relating to land under temporary settlement or land exempt from the
payment of revenue to the Government. In order rectify the repressive effect and in future
there may be no confusion between stamp -revenue proper and the revenue derived from
what have heretofore been termed judicial stamps, a comprehensive Bill i.e., the Court -
fees Bill was introduced in the Legislature.
STATEMENT OF OBJECTS AND REASONS
The rates of stamp fees leviable in Courts and offices established beyond the local
limits of the ordinary original civil jurisdiction of the High Courts of Judicature at Fort
William, Madras and Bombay and in proceedings on the app ellate side of such High
Courts, were as fixed by Act XXVI of 1867, to a great extent tentative.
The experience gained of their working during the two years in which they have
been in force, seems to be conclusive as to their repressive effect on t he general litigation
of the country.
It is, therefore, thought expedient to make a general reduction in the rates now
chargeable on the institution of civil suits, and to revert to the principle of maximum fee
which obtained under the former law.
It is proposed also to reduce the valuation fixed by the existing law for the
computation of the fee leviable on suits relating to land under temporary settlement or land
exempt from the payment of revenue to the Government which is believ ed to be at least
relatively excessive as compared with the valuation of permanently settled land; and to
provide for the valuation of suits relating to mere parcels of land which, though forming
part of estates under settlement, bear no specific allotment of any portion of the
assessment of Government revenue on such estates, at the estimated selling price of
such land, as was the rule in those cases under Act X of 1862.
The want of some fixed valuation applicable to certain classes on suits, as for examp le,
suits instituted between landlord and tenant to recover a right of occupancy or enforce
ejectment, or suits for maintenance or for an annuity the subject -matter of which though
not absolutely indeterminable, is certainly not susceptible of ready determ ination, has
given rise to much uncertainty and variety in the procedure adopted
THE COURT-FEES ACT,1870 2
by the several Courts in such cases; and the amendment of the existing law in this respect
is felt to be urgently called for.
In deference to the strong objections entertained by the local authorities in certain
Provinces to the retention of the fee imposed on the presentation of certain petitions in the
Criminal Courts, it is proposed to reduce the amount of such fee from one rupee to eight
annas.
The uniform exaction of a fee of eight annas in the case of all petitions addressed
to a Revenue Officer or a Magi strate, works harshly in its application to such
communications when presented by persons having dealings or transactions with the
Government in relation to such transactions. Equitable considerations require that
petitions of this kind should be excepted from the operation of the general rule, and the Bill
makes suitable provision for such cases.
The ad valorem fee now chargeable on summary suits instituted under Act XVI of
1838 and the Bombay Act (5 of 1864), is represented as working unsatisfactorily, a nd the
substitution of a fixed rate is recommended.
It is to be observed that an award in such cases is liable to be set aside by a
judgment passed in regard to the same matter in a regular suit; hence it appears more
equitable to treat these summary suit s as miscellaneous applications and to subject them
to a similar fixed institution fee.
As the Bill provides for a considerable reduction of the fees heretofore chargeable
on civil suits of small amount, it seems unnecessary to maintain the present distin ction
between the Courts of Cantonment Joint Magistrates and other Civil Courts in respect of
the amount of fee leviable on the institution of such suits.
It is proposed also to exempt suits instituted in a Military Court of Requests from
the payment of a ny fee. The constitution of such Courts is peculiar; they form no part of
the regular machinery employed in the general administration of justice, the present
measure therefore is inapplicable to them. Moreover, the suitor in such Courts is placed at
this disadvantage as compared with suitors in the ordinary Civil Courts that, although he
may gain his case, he is unable to recover the costs which he has incurred in prosecuting
his claim; hence the incidence of the taxation imposed by the levy of an institut ion fee in
such cases is inequitable.
Suits for the restitution of wives, which are of common occurrence in Punjab are
held to be somewhat excessively taxed under the present law, which prescribes that in
suits the money value of the subject -matter of whi ch cannot be estimated, a fixed fee of
Rs. 10 shall be levied; the Bill substitutes for that rate in such cases, a special fee of Rs. 5.
The clause in Act XXVI of 1867, exempting Advocates of a High Court from the
obligation of presenting to any Court a w ritten authority empowering them to Act in any
case pending in such Court is excluded from the Bill. Such a provision appears to be
beyond the scope of an enactment for regulating the levy of Court -fees. It is, moreover,
open to the objection that it confl icts with section 18 of the Civil Procedure Code, and
consequently creates some doubt as to the intention of the Legislature.
As some measures of compensation for the loss of revenue which is expected to
result from the general reduction"Of fees, it is proposed to discontinue the refund of
THE COURT-FEES ACT,1870 3
any portion of the amount, levied on the first institution of suits, and also to raise the fees
heretofore chargeable on probates and letters of administration granted under the Indian
Succession Act, and on certifica tes issued under Act XXVII of 1860, to the ad valorem
rates leviable under the English law in like cases.
The abolition of refunds is justified by the" consideration that for all practical
purposes in the majority of cases, the plaintiff, whose suit has n ot gone beyond the stage
at which under the present law he is entitled to recover a moiety of the institution fee, has
gained as much through the Court’s agency as the suitor whose case has proceeded to a
decision, and that, therefore, on the principle on which all Court -fees are adjusted, the
former should contribute in equal proportion with the latter to the maintenance of the
Courts from whose action both derive an equal benefit.
In lieu of the existing rates of process-fees, which vary according to the distance of
the Court by which the processes are issued from the place where they are to be served
or executed, it is proposed to levy, by means of stamps, a uniform rate in all cases. All
suitors will thus be required to contribute in equal proportion to the maintenance of the
establishment employed in the serving of processes, without reference to the length of
time occupied in each service and the consequent amount of work rendered on behalf of
each person at whose instance any process is served or executed.
Such a provision is in accordance with the modern system under which the
charges in the Postal and Electric and Telegraph Departments are regulated, and is also
more equitable to the general community.
The incorporation of the High Court -Fees Act (XV of 1868) with and the transfer of
so much of the provisions of the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1865, the Native
Converts' Marriage Dissolution Act, 1866, the Punjab Tenancy Act, 1868, the Indian
Divorce Act, and the Indian Income -tax Act, as relate to the levy of stamp fees in judicial
proceedings, to the present Bill appear to be conducive to public convenience, as the
whole of the existing law relating to fees leviable in all Courts of justice will thus be
contained in one enactment.
With the same object this Bill purports to effect a complete re -arrangement of the
provisions of the existing law o n this subject, a similar classification of instrum ents
chargeable with. Court -fees to that which obtains in the General Stamp Act having been
adopted, an d the rules for determining the value of the subject -matter of certain suits
being transferred from the Schedule where they are to be found in Act XXVI
of 1867 to the body of the proposed Act.! •
Lastly, th at for the future there may be no confusion bet ween stamp -revenue
proper and the revenue derived from "what have heretofore been termed judicial stamps
the proceeds of the proposed enactment are to be designated court -fees, and the Bill is
entitled accordingly.
ACT 7 OF 1870
The Court -fees Bill hav ing been passed by the Legislature received its assent on 11th
March, 1870. It came into force on 1st day of April as THE COURT-FEES ACT, 1870
(7 of 1870).
THE COURT-FEES ACT,1870 4
LIST OF AMENDING ACTS AND ADAPTATION ORDERS
1. The Repealing Act, 1870 ( 14 of 1870).
2. The Court-fees Act (1870) Amendment Act, 1870 (20 of 1870).
3. The Indian Registration Act, 1871(8 of 1871).
4. The Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872 (15 of 1872).
5. The Probate and Administration Act, 1875 (13 of 1875).
6. The Punjab Court Act, 1884 (18 of 1884).
7. The Probate and Administration Act 1889 (6 of 1889).
8. The Succession Certificate Act, 1889 (7 of 1889).
9. The Cantonment Act, 1889 (13 of 1889).
10. The Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 (8 of 1890).
11. The Amending Act, 1891 (12 of 1891).
12. The Court-fees Amendment Act, 1899 (11 of 1899)
13. The Punjab Courts Act, 1899 (25 of 1899).
14. The Court-fees (Amendment) Act, 1901(10 of1901).
15. The Court –fees (Amendment) Act, 1905 (6 of 1905).
16. The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908).
17. The Court –fees (Amendment) Act, 1910 (7 of 1910).
18. The Court- fees (Amendment) Act 1911 (14 of 1911).
19. The Second Repealing and Amending Act, 1914 (17 of 1914).
20. The Devolution Act, 1920 (38 of 1920).
21. The Court-fees (Amendment) Act, 1922 (19 of 1922).
22. The Repealing and Amending Act, 1923 (11 of 1923).
23. The Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act, 1923 (18 of 1923).
24. The Government of India (Adaptation of Indian Laws) Order, 1937.
25. The Indian Independence (Adaptation of Central Acts and Ordinances)
Order, 1948.
26. The Adaptation Laws Order, 1950.
27. Adaptation of Laws (No. 2) Order, 1956.
28. The Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 1999 (46 of 1999).
THE COURT-FEES ACT,1870 5
(7 of 1870)
[11th March, 1870)
CHAPTER 1
PRELIMINARY
1. Short title.-This Act may be called the Court-fees Act, 1870.
Extent of Act.-It extends to the whole of India except I[the territories which, immediately
before the 1st November, 1956, were comprised in Part B States].
Commencement of Act.-And it shall come into force on the first day of April, 1870.
2[1A. Definition of "Appr opriate Government". -In this Act "the Appropriate
Government" means, in relation to fees or stamps relating to documents presented or to
be presented before any officer serving under the Central Government, that Government,
and in relation to any other fees or stamps, the State Government.]
COMMENTS
The enactment of the Act is intended to provide revenue to the State. It has been
held that this is a fiscal statute and like identical legislations its provisions and
connotations must be constru ed in its strict sense; Chief In spector of Stamps, Uttar
Pradesh v. Mahant Lakshmi Narain, AIR 1970 All 488.
3[2. "Chief Controlling Revenue-authority" defined.-[Rep. by the A.O. 1937.]]
CHAPTER 11
FEES IN THE HIGH COURTS AND IN THE COURTS OF SMALL
CAUSES AT THE PRESIDENCY-TOWNS
3. Levy of fees in High Courts on their original sides. - The fees payable for the time
being to the clerks and officers (other than the sheriffs and attorneys) of 4[the 5[High
Courts other than those of Kerala, Mysore and Rajasthan]],
Or chargeable in each of such Courts under No. II of the First, and Nos. 7, 12, 14,
6[***] 20 and 21 of the Second Schedule to this Act annexed;
Levy of Fees in Presidency Small Cause Courts .-And the fees for the time
being chargeable in the Courts of Small Causes at the7 presidency -towns, and their
several offices;
shall be collected in manner hereinafter appearing.
1. Subs. by the Adaptation of Laws (No.2) Order, 1956, for "Part B States"
2. Ins. by the A.O. 1937.
3. The original section 2 (relating to repeal of enactments) rep. by Act 14 of 1870. It
was again added by Act 10 of 1901, sec. 2 (defining "Chief Controlling Revenue
Authority" and was slightly amended by Act 24 of 1917).
4. Subs. by the A.O. 1950, for "the Courts which are High Courts for the purposes of
the Government of India Act, 1935".
5. Subs by the Adaptation of Laws (No.2) Order, 1956, for "High Courts for Part A
States".
6. The number "16", rep. by Act 12 of 1891, sec. 2 and Sch. I.
7. See the Presidency Small Cause Courts Act, 1882 (15 of 1882)
THE COURT-FEES ACT,1870 6
4. Fees on documents filed, etc., in High Courts in their extraordinary
jurisdiction.-No document of any of the kinds specified in the First or Second Schedule to
this Act annexed, as chargeable with fees, shall be filed, exhibited or recorded or shall be
received or furnished by, any of the said High Courts in any case comi ng before such
Court in the exercise of its extraordinary original civil jurisdiction;
or in the exercise of its extraordinary original criminal jurisdiction;
In their appellate jurisdicti on.--or in the exercise of its jurisdiction as reg ards
appeals from the 1[judgments (other than judgments passed in the exercise of ordinary
original civil jurisdiction of the Court) or one] or more Judges of the s aid Court, or of a
Division Court;
or in the exercise of its jurisdiction as regards appeals from the Courts subject its
superintendence;
As Courts of reference and revision .--or in the exercise of its jurisdiction as
Court of reference or revision;
unless in respect of such document there be paid a fee of an amount not less than
that indicated by either of the said Schedules as the proper fee for such document
COMMENTS
It has been held that a final decree for future mesne profits passed under Order XX
rule 12(2) CPC is like an award and does not amount to a decree under section 2(2) of the
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and is not a decree as stipulated under Schedule II o f the
Act. Diwan Brothers v. Central Bank of India, 1976 (2) ALR (SC) Summary.
5. Procedure in case of difference as to necessity or amount of fee.-When any
difference arises between the officer whose duty it is to see that any fee is paid under this
Chapter and any suitor or attorney, as to the necessity of paying a fee or the amount
thereof, the question shall, when the difference arises in any of said High Courts, be
referred to the taxing -officer, whose decision thereon shall be final, except when the
question is, in his opinion, one of general importance, in which case he shall refer it to the
final decision of the Chief Justice of such High Court, or of such Judge of the High Court
as the Chief Justice shall appoint either generally or specially in this behalf.
When any such difference arises in any of the said Courts of Small Causes, the
question shall be referred to the Clerk of the Court, whose decision thereon shall be final,
except when the question is, in his opinion, one of general importance , in which case he
shall refer it to the final decision of the first Judge of such Court.
The Chief Justice shall declare who shall be taxing -officer within the meaning of
the first paragraph of this section.
COMMENTS
It has been held that under section 5 the order or judgement of the Taxing Judge is
final and no appeal is maintainable against such an order or judgement; S. Rm. Ar. S. Sp.
Sathappa Chettiar v. S. Rm. Ar. Rm. Ramanathan Chettiar, AIR 1958 SC 245.
1. Subs. by Act 19 of 1922, sec. 2. for judgment of two"
THE COURT-FEES ACT,1870 7
CHAPTER III
FEES IN OTHER COURTS AND IN PUBLIC OFFICES
6. Fees on documents filed, etc., in Mofussil Courts or in public offices.---
Except in the Courts hereinbefore mentioned, no document of any of the kinds specified
as chargeable in the First or Second Schedule to this Act annexed shall be filed, exhibited
or recorded in any Court of Justice, or shall be received or furnished by any public officer,
unless in respect of such document there be paid a fee of an amount not less than that
indicated by either of the said Schedules as the proper fee for such document.
COMMENTS
It has been held that while exercising the inherent powers the court should apply
section 6 as court fee has to be paid on the documents received by the court. For this
purpose the court may afford an opportunity to the party to pay such court -fee; Netramalli
Dibya v. Dasarthi Misra, AIR 1986 Ori 235
7. Computation of fees payable in certain suits .-The amount of fee payable
under this Act in the suits next hereinafter mentioned shall be computed as follows :-
for money.-(i) In suits for money (including suits for damages or compensation, or
arrears o f maintenance, of annuities, or of other sums payable periodically) -
according to the amount claimed;
for maintenance and annuities .-(ii) In suits for maintenance and annuities or
other sums payable periodically -according to the value of the subjectmatter of the
suit, and such value shall be deemed to be ten times the amount claimed to be
payable for one year;
for other moveable pro perty having a market -value.-(iii) In suits for moveable
property other than money, where the subject -matter has a marketvalue-according
to such value at the date of presenting the plaint;
(iv) In suits-
for moveable property of no market -value.-(a) for moveable property where the
subject-matter has no market -value, as, for instance, in the case of documents
relating to title,
to enforce a right to share in joint family property.-(b) to enforce the right to
share in any property on the ground that it is joint family property,
for a declaratory decree and consequential relief.-( c) to obtain a declaratory
decree or order, where consequential relief is prayed,
for an injunction.-(d) to obtain an injunction,
for easements.-(e) for a right to some benefit (not herein otherwise provided for)
to arise out of land, and
for accounts.-(f) for accounts-
according to the amount at which the relief sought is valued in the plaint or
memorandum of appeal.
THE COURT-FEES ACT,1870 8
In all such suits the plaintiff shall state the amount at which he values the relief sought
1[***];
for possession of land, houses and gardens.-{v) In suits for the possession of land, houses
and gardens-according to the value of the subject-matter; and such value shall be deemed
to be-
where the subject-matter is land, and-
(a) where the land forms an entire estate, or a definite share of an estate, paying
annual revenue to Government,
or forms part of such an estate and is recorded in the Collector's register as
separately assessed with such revenue;
and such revenue is permanently settled-ten times the revenue so payable;
(b) where the land forms an entire estate, or a definite share of an estate, paying
annual revenue to Government, or forms part of such estate and is recorded as
aforesaid;
and such revenue is settled, but not permanently -five times the revenue so
payable;
(c) where the land pays no such revenue, or has been partially exempted from
such payment, or is charged with any fixed payment in lieu of such revenue,
and net profits have arisen from the land during the year next before the date of
presenting the plaint-
fifteen times such net profits;
but where no such net profits have arisen there from-the amount at which the
Court shall estimate the land with reference to the value of similar land in the
neighbourhood;
(d) where the land forms part of an estate p aying revenue to Government, but is
not a definite share of such estate and is not separately assessed as above -
mentioned-the market-value of the land;
Proviso as to Bombay Presidency.-Provided that, in the territories subject to the
2Governor of Bombay in Council, the value of the land shall be deemed to be-
(1) where the land is held on settlement for a period not exceeding thirty years and
pays the full assessment to Government -a sum equal to five times the survey -
assessment;
(2) where the land is he ld on a permanent settlement, or on a settlement for any
period exceeding thirty years, and pays the full assessment to Government -a sum
equal to ten times the survey assessment; and
_________________________
1. The words "and the provision of the Code of Civil Procedure, section thirty -one,
shall apply as if, for the word 'claim', the words 'relief sought' were substituted" rep. by Act
12 of 1891, sec. 2 and sch. I.
2. See paragraph 8 of the A.O. 1937. In view of this provision the expression
"Governor of Bombay in Council" has been left unmodified.
THE COURT-FEES ACT,1870 9
(3) where the whole or any part of the annual survey -assessment is remitte d-sum
computed under paragraph (1) or paragraph (2) of this proviso, as the case
may be, in addition to ten times the assessment, or the portion of
assessment, so remitted.
Explanation.-The word "estate", as used in this paragraph, means any
land subject to the payment of revenue, for which the proprietor or a farmer
or ryot shall have executed a separate engagement to Government, or
which, in the absence of such engagement, shall have been separately
assessed with revenue;
for houses and gardens.-(e) where the subject-matter is a house or garden-according to
the market-value of the house or garden;
to enforce a right of pre-emption.-(vi) In suits to enforce a right of preemption-according
to the value [computed in accordance with paragraph (v) of this section] of the land, house
or garden in respect of which the right is claimed;
for interest of assignee of land -revenue.-(vii) In suits for the interest of an assignee of
land-revenue-fifteen times his net profits as such for the year next before t he date of.
presenting the plaint;
to set aside an attachment .-(viii) In suits to set aside an attachment of land or of an
interest in land or revenue -according to the amount for which the land or interest was
attached:
Provided that, where such amount exceeds the value of the land or interest, the amount of
fee shall be computed as if the suit were for the possession of such land or interest;
to redeem.-(ix) In suits against a mortgagee for the recovery of the property mortgaged,
to forecIose .-and i n suits by a mortgagee to foreclose the mortgage, or, where the
mortgage is made by conditional sale, to have the sale declared absolute-
according to the principal money expressed to be secured by the instrument of mortgage;
for specific performance.-(x) In suits for specific performance-
(a) of a contract of sale -according to the amount of the consideration; (b) of a contract of
mortgage-according to the amount agreed to be secured; (c) of a contract of lease -
according to the aggregate amount of the fine or
premium (if any) and of the rent agreed to be paid during the first year of the term;
(d) of an award-according to the amount or value of the property in dispute;
between landlord and tenant.-(xi) In the following suits between landlord and tenant:-
(a) for the delivery by a tenant of the counterpart of lease,
(b) to enhance the rent of a tenant having a right of occupancy, (c) for the delivery by a
landlord of a lease,
'[(cc) for the recovery of immoveable property from a tenant, including a tenant
holding over after the determination of a tenancy,] .
_____________________
1. Ins. by Act 6 1905, sec. 2(1)
THE COURT-FEES ACT,1870 10
(d) to contest a' notice of ejectment.
(e) to recover the occupancy of l[immoveable property] from which a tenant has
been illegally ejected by the landlord, and
(f) for abatement of rent-
according to the amount of the rent of the l[immov eable property] to which the
suit refers, payable for the year next before the date of presenting the plaint.
COMMENTS
(i) In general the court -fee has to be decided on the basis of the subject -matter of
the suit and the appeal arising therefrom. It s hall not be substantially affected by the claim
as set out in the relief by the plaintiff; In Re. Thirupathiammal, AIR 1956 Mad 179.
(ii) It has been held that the question of court-fee must be decided having regard to
the averments made in the plaint itself and the contentions raised in the written statement
or the final decision on merits cannot affect the same; Sathappa Chettiar v. R amanathan
Chettiar, AIR 1958 SC 245.
(iii) It has been held that when the plaintiff paid ad valorem court -fee in a suit for
recovery of a specific calculated amount as damages on account of leakage of cooking
gas cylinder leading to accident the valuation was correct; Bhagwant Sarup v. Himalay
Gas Co., AIR 1985 HP 41.
(iv) It has held that in a suit for partition the share claimed by the plaintiff would
determine the court -fee and not the property as a whole; Rakesh Chandra Das v. Khan
Bahadur Abdul Majid Choudhary, AIR 1982 Gau 82.
(v) It has been held that valuation as set up by the plaintiff in the plaint of the suit is
conclusive and final; Kesho Mahton v. Ayodhya Mahton, AIR 1983 Pat 67.
(vi) It has been held that sec tion 7(iv) (f) is applicable to a s uit for dissolution of
partnership at will and rendition of accounts in as much as it is a suit for accounts and
value for jurisdiction and court -fee is the same ad valorem court -fee to be paid under
section 7; Madan Mohan Sharma v. Vttam Singh Bagga, AIR 1985 J&K 87.
(vii) The Code of Civil Procedure empowers the court to make up deficiency of court -fees
and under Order VII rule 11 it is provided that the plaint shall be rejected where the relief
claimed is undervalued, and the plaintiff on being required by the court to correct the
valuation within a time to be fixed by the court fails to do so. It has been held in such
cases where the valuation made by the plaintiff in respect of the s uit property is
unreasonable and arbitrary the court can exercise its powers vested in it under Order VII
rule 11 CPC; Mana Das v. Kisto Das, AIR 1983 Pat 272.
(viii) The Delhi High Court has held that if plaintiff files a suit for declarations and
injunctions and the reliefs claimed are wholly independent of each other then the suit is
not governed by section 7(iv)(c); S.c. Malik v. Surender Nath Puri, 1991 RLR (N0TE) 85.
(ix) It has been held that the words 'subject -matter' used in the section include relief or
reliefs; Md. Hafiz v. Mustt Noorjahan, AIR 1989 Gau 13
(x) It has been held that in a single suit for recovery filed by a Bank against the
defendant borrower pertaining to separate accounts in its different bran ches court-fee has
to be paid on each of the account separately; Bank of India v. Vinod Kumar Bhalla, AIR
1988 Del 79.
(xi) It has been held that paragraph (iv) of section 7 of the Act gives a right to the
plaintiff in any of the suits mentio ned in the clauses of that paragraph to place any
valuation that he likes on the reliefs he seeks, subject, however to any rules made under
section 9 of the Suit
________________________
1. Subs. by Act 6 1905, sec. 2, for "land"
THE COURT-FEES ACT,1870 11
Valuation Act and the court has no power to interfere with the plaintiff s valuation; Shiela
Devi v. KislUUl Lal Kalra, ILR (1974) 2 Del (FB) 491; Commercial Aviation & Travel Co. v.
Vimal Pannalal, AIR 1988 SC 1636.
8. Fee on memorandum of appeal against order relating to compensation.The
amount of fee payable under this Act on a memoqmdum of appeal agai -nst an order
relating to compensation under any Act for the time being in force for the lacquisition of
land for p ublic purposes, shall be computed according to the difference between the
amount awarded and the amount claimed by the appellant.
COMMENTS
It has been held that the amount of court fee paya ble on a memorandum of appeal
against an order relating to compensation for the acquisition of land for public purposes is
to be computed only on difference between amount of compensation awarded and the
amount claimed and not on the amount of valuation; M oulvi Abun Naser v. Special
Tehsildar for Land Acquisition, AIR
1986 Mad 229.
9. Power to ascertain net profits or market -value.-If the Court sees reason to
think that the annual net profits or the market -value of any such land, house or garden as
is mentioned in section 7, paragraphs (v) and (vi), have or has been wrongly estimated,
the Court may, for the purpose of computing the fee payable in any suit therein mentioned,
issue a commission to any proper person directing him to make such local o r other
investigation as may be necessary, and to report thereon to the
Court.
10. Procedure where net profit or market -value wrongly estimated.-(i) If in the
result of any such investigation the Court finds that the net profits or market -value have or
has been wrongly estimated, the Court, if the estimation has been excessive, may in its
discretion refund the excess paid as such fee : but, if the estimation has been insufficient,
the Court shall require the plaintiff to pay so much additional fee as wou ld have been
payable had the said market-value or net profits been rightly
estimated.
(ii) In such case the suit shall be stayed until the additional fee is paid. If the additional
fee is not paid within such time as the Court shall fix, the suit shall be
dismissed.
2[* * *]
11. Procedure in suits for mesne profits or account when amount decreed exceeds
amount claimed.-In suits for mesna profits or for immoveable property and mesne profits,
or for an account, if the profits or amount decreed are or is in excess of the profits claimed
or the amount at which the plaintiff valued the relief sought, the decree shall not be
executed until the difference between the fee actually paid and the fee which would have
been payable had the suit comprised the whole of the profits or amount so decreed shall
have been paid to the proper officer.
Where the amount of mesne profits is left to be ascertained in the course of the execution
of the decree, if the profits so ascertained exceed the profits claimed, the further execution
of the decree shall be stayed until the difference between the fee
1. See now the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (1 of 1894).
2. Clause (Hi) rep. by Act 12 of 1891, sec. 2 and Sch. I
THE COURT-FEES ACT,1870 12
actually paid and the fee which would have been payable had the suit comprised the
whole of the profits so ascertained is paid. If the additional fee is not paid within such time
as the Court shall fix, the suit shall be dismissed.
COMMENTS
(i) It has b een held that a separate application to raise objection with regard to
undervaluation of deficiency in court -fee is not required and such objection can be
contemplated from the written statement; Panna Lal v .. Mohan Lal, AIR 1985 Raj 178.
(ii) It has bee n held that if the amount of mesne profits to be awarded after
ascertaining the same exceed the pecuniary jurisdiction of the court the suit must be
transferred to a court of competent jurisdiction; Siya Saran Singh v. Jamuna Devi, AIR
1987 Pat 1.
(iii) It has been held that objection in respect of pecuniary jurisdiction must be raised at
the earliest opportunity; Smt. Baba Dai v. Muneshwar Jha, AIR 1985 Pat 67.
(iv) It has been held that there is no provision either in the Code of Civil Procedure,
1908 or in the Court -fees Act, 1870 for decreeing any amount of compensation paid or
received while the suit is pending adjudication or for the payment of court -fees after
decree has been passed; Usha Sales Ltd. v. Smt. Aruna Gupta, AIR 1988 (NOC) 74 Del.
12. Decision of questions as to valuation. -(i) Every question relating to valuation for
the purpose of determining the amount of any fee chargeable under this Chapter on a
plaint or memorandum of appeal, shall be decided by the Court in which such plaint or
memorandum, as the case may be, is filed, and such decision shall be final as between
the parties to the suit.
(ii) But whenever any such suit comes before a Court of appeal, reference or revision,
if such Court considers that the said question has been wron gly decided, to the detriment
of the revenue, it shall require the party by whom such fee has been paid to pay so much
additional fee as would have been payable had the question been rightly decided, and the
provisions of section 10, paragraph (ii), shall apply.
COMMENTS
(i) It has been held in a suit for partition where plaintiff was in possession that
valuation for jurisdiction is the market value of plaintiffs share and the same is applicable
in its appeal therefrom as well; Pamban Kayakkal Vatsalam v. Pamban Kayakkal
Kanmudi, AIR 1982 Ker 304.
(ii) It has been that the order for remanding the case on the ground of non -payment of
requisite court -fee is illegal where no such objection was raised before the trial court;
Pargat Singh v. Union of India, AIR 1981 Del 328.
13. Refund of fee paid on memorandum of appeal.-If an appeal or plaint, which has
been rejected by the lower Court on any of the grounds mentioned in the 1Code of Civil
Procedure, is ordered to be received, or if a suit is remanded in ap peal, on any of the
grounds mentioned in section 351 of the same Code, for a second decision by the lower
Court, the Appellate Court shall grant to the appellant a certificate, authorizing him to
receive back from the Collector the full amount of fee paid on the memorandum of appeal:
Provided that, if in, the case of a remand in appeal, the order of remand shall not
cover the whole of the subject-matter of the suit, the certificate so granted shall
_------------------------------------------
1. See now the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908).
THE COURT-FEES ACT,1870 13
not authorize the appellant to receive back more than so much fee as would have been
originally payable on the part or parts of such subject-matter in respect whereof the
suit has been remanded.
COMMENTS
(i) It has been held that refund of court -fee could be ordered even where a case is
remanded under the amended provisions of Order XLI, rule 23 of the Code of Civil
Procedure; State of Uttar Pradesh v. Chandra Bhushan Misra, AIR 1980 SC 591.
(ii) It has been held that where a suit is transferred to the High Court under clause
13 of Letters Patent court -fee cannot be refunded; The Official Receiver, Coimbatore v.
Sar Gounder,
AIR 1980 Mad 269.
14. Refund of fee on application for review of judgment. -Where an application
for a review of judgment is presented on or after the ninetieth day from the date of the
decree, the Court, unless the delay was caused by the applicant's laches, may, in its
discretion, grant him a certificate authorizing him to receive back from the Collector so
much of the fee paid on the application as exceeds the fee which would have been
payable had it been presented before such day.
15. Refund where Court reverses or modifies its former decision on ground
of mistake.-Where an application for a review of judgment is admitted, and where, on the
rehearing, the Court reverses or modifies its former decision on the ground of mistake in
law or fact, the applicant shall be entitled to a certificate from the Court authorizing him to
receive back from the Collector so much of the fee paid on the I[application] as exceeds
the fee payable on any other application to such Court under the Second Sc hedule to this
Act, No.1, clause (b) or clause (d).
But nothing in the former part of this section shall entitle the applicant to such
certificate where the reversal or modification is due, wholly or in part, to fresh evidence
which might have been produced at the original hearing.
2[16. Refund of fee.-Where the Court refers the parties to the suit to anyone of the
mode of settlement of dispute referred to in section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure,
1908 (5 of 1908), the plaintiff shall be en titled to a certificate from the Court authorising
him to receive back from the collector, the full amount of paid in respect of such plaint.] .
17. Multifarious suits .-Where a suit embraces two or more distinct subjects, the
plaint or memorandum of app eal shall be chargeable with the aggregate amount of the
fees to which the' plaints or memoranda of appeal in suits embracing separately each of
such subjects would be liable under this Act.
Nothing in the former part of this section shall be deemed to af fect the power conferred by
the 3Code of Civil Procedure, section 9.
18. Written examinations of complainants.-When the first or only examination of
a person who complains of the offence of wrongful confinement, or of wrongful restraint, or
of any offence other than an offence for which police-officers may arrest
_________________
1. Subs. by Act 20 of 1870, sec. 1, for "plaint or memorandum of appeal".
2. Section 16 rep. by Act 5 of 1908 and again ins. by Act 46 of 1999, sec. 34.
3. See now the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908)
THE COURT-FEES ACT,1870 14
without a Warrant, and who has not already presented a petition on which fee been levied
under this Act, is reduced to writi ng under the provisions of the 1Code of Criminal
Procedure, the complainant shall pay a fee of eight annas, unless Court thinks fit to remit
such payment.
19. Exemption of certain documents .-Nothing contained in the Act shall re nder the
following documents chargeable with any fee:-
(i) Power-of-attorney to institute or defend a suit when executed 2[by a mem ber of
any of the Armed Forces of the Union] not in civil employment. 3[* * *]
(iii) Written statements called for by the Court after the first hearing of a suit 4[* * *]
(v) Plaints in suits tried by 5 Village Munsiffs in the Presidency of Fort St. Georage
(vi) Plaints and processes in suits before District Panchayats in the sa me
Presidency.
(vii) Plaints in suits before Collectors under Madras Regulation XII of 1816.
(viii)Probate of a will, letters of administration, 6[and, save as regards debts and
securities, a certificate under Bombay Regulation VIII of 1827], where amount
or value of the property in respect of which the probate or letters
or certificate shall be granted does not exceed one thousand rupees.
(ix) Application or petition to a Collector or other officer making a settlement
of land -revenue, or to a Board of Revenue, or a Commissioner of Revenu e
relating to matters connected with the assessment of land, or the
ascertainment of rights thereto or interests therein, if presented previous to the
final confirmation of such settlement.
(x) Application relating to a supply for irrigation of water belonging to
Government. ,
(xi) Application for leave to extend cultivation, or to relinquish land, when
presented to an officer of land -revenue by a person holding, under direct
engagement with Government, land of which the revenu e is settled but not .
permanently.
(xii) Application for service of notice of relinquis hment of land or of enhancement
of rent.
(xiii) Written authority to an agent to distrain.
__________________________
1. See now the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974).
2. Subs. by the A.O. 1950, for "by an officer, warrant -officer, now -commissioned
officer or private
of Her Majesty's Army".
3. Clause (ii) rep. by Act 12 of 1891, sec. 2 and Sch. I.
4. Clause (iv) rep. by Act l3 of 1889, sec. 2 and Sch.
5. See the Madras Village Courts Act, 1889 (Madras Act I of 1889).
6. Subs. by Act 7 of 1889, sec. 13, for "and certificate mentioned in the First Schedule
to this Act.
THE COURT-FEES ACT,1870 15
(xiv) First application (other than a petition containing a criminal charge or
information) for the summons of a witness or other person to a ttend either to
give evidence or to produce a document, or in respect of the production or filing
of an exhibit not being an affidavit made for the -immediate purpose of being
produced in Court.
(xv) Bail-bonds in criminal cases, recognizances to pros ecute or give evidence, and
recognizances for personal appearance or otherwise.
(xvi) Petition, application, charge or information respecting any offence, when
presented, made or laid to or before a police -officer, or to or before the 1Heads
of Villages or the 2Village Police in the territories respectively subject to the
Governors in Council of Madras and Bombay.
(xvii) Petition by a prisoner, or other person in duress or under restraint of any Court
or its officers.
(xviii) Complaint of a public servant (as defined in the Indian Penal Code), a
municipal officer, or an officer or servant of a Railway Company.
(xix) Application for permission to cut timber in Government forests, or otherwise
relating to such forests.
(xx) Application for the payment of money due by Government to the applicant. (xxi)
Petition of appeal against the chaukidari assessment under Act No. 20 of 1856,
or against any municipal tax.
(xxii) Applications for compensation under any law for the time being in force relating
to the 4acquisition of property for public purposes.
(xxiii) Petitions presented to the Special Commissioner appointed under 'Bengal Act
No.2 of 1869 (to ascertain, regulate and record certain tenures in Chota
Nagpur).
6[(xxiv) Petitions under the Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872, sections 45 and 48.]
7[CHAPTER IlIA
PROBATES, LETTERS OF ADMINISTRATION AND CERTIFICATES OF
ADMINISTRATION
19A. Relief where too high a court -fee has been paid.-Where any person on . applying
for the probate of a will or letters of ad ministration has estimated the property of the
deceasExcerpt shown. Open the full act in Lexace.