Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: the kerala court fees and suits valuation amendment act 1972 1 Court: chennai Page 1 of about 758 results (0.127 seconds)

Sudhir V. Joshi Vs. E. Kanniappan and anr.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : 1997(2)CTC73; (1997)IIMLJ27

..... question of payment of court-fees under schedule ii, article 3(1) of the andhra pradesh court-fees and suits valuation act came for consideration before the andhra pradesh high court in the decision reported in biksha reddy and ors. v. g. ..... the court-fees act being a fiscal statute, we cannot in the presence of an ambiguity guess at the meaning of the authority which enacts the rules and draw from the presumed intentions of that authority an inference which is adverse to the party who has to pay the tax.article 17-a applies in terms to a plaint or memorandum of appeal in a suit. ..... if the claimant need pay court-fee only on the application, a person who has already obtained a decree and seeking execution, cannot be compelled to pay more court-fee, and that too on ad valorem basis. ..... it is said that court should bear in mind three well-known cannons of interpretation of fiscal statues, namely: (i) such statutes are to be construed strictly, (ii) the subject should not be made liable for payment of enhanced court- fee unless such a step is warranted by the clear provisions of the statute; and (iii) where there is doubt in the matter, an interpretation favourable to the subject should be preferred.5. ..... even after the code of civil procedure was amended under act 104 of 1976, there is no corresponding amendment to the court fee act. ..... i may say that this decision wasn't accepted but distinguished by the kerala high court in the decision reported in anto mamkoottam v. ..... 104 of 1972. .....

M.V. Valliappan and ors. Vs. Income-tax Officer and ors.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1988)67CTR(Mad)289; [1988]170ITR238(Mad)

..... in the kerala decision a division bench of the kerala high court while construing the provisions of section 171 of the act took the view that there are no express words in section 171, nor is there any necessary implication arising from the words of the section that the income which was really the income of the members of the family after the division in status of the family must be treated as or deemed to be the income of the hindu undivided family which has been created by the legal ..... union of india, air 1968 sc 1138, where, in paragraph 37, the supreme court while dealing with the challenge to the validity of the land acquisition (amendment and short title validation) act, 1967, on the ground of violation of article 14 of the constitution of india, has observed as follows (p. ..... pointed out by lord fraser at page 470, the taxpayer in the two cases before the house of lords bought a complete scheme for which he paid a fee and thereafter he was not required to produce any more money, although large sums of money were credited and debited to him in the course of the complicated transactions required to carry out the scheme. ..... it is obvious that it suits the revenue to say that the provisions of section 171(9) are not intended for taxing an income of one person in the hands of another, because, if this was the purpose and object of section 171, that would create an infirmity in the section, as such is not the power of parliament under entry ..... sakarlal balabhai : [1972]86itr2(sc) . 81 .....

Amalorpavam Higher Secondary School, Rep. by its Correspondent Vs. Uni ...

Court : Chennai

..... the petitioner, an unaided private minority school, seeks to lay a challenge to the memorandum bearing no.09/dse/ee/fc/2015 dated 19.08.2015 issued by the third respondent/fee committee of the directorate of school education, government of puducherry alleging that the said memorandum and the amendments made to the puducherry school education (amendment) rules, 2014 are ultra vires the parent act i.e. ..... the issue is that both various high courts and the hon ble supreme court have been called upon to take an approach of providing some regulation to the unbridled power of specifying fee. 26. ..... high court judge / retired i.a.s officer nominated by the government.chairperson(2) director of school educationmember-secretary(3) chief engineer (buildings), public works departmentex officio member(4) deputy secretary / under secretary (education)ex officio member(5) joint director of school educationex officio member(6) deputy director of elementary educationex officio member(7) senior accounts officer, directorate of school educationex officio member(8) chartered accoun tant nominated by the governmentmember(9) three representatives of private school managementsmembers (ii) terms and conditions of office of the chairperson and ..... in order to buttress the case, the petitioner has relied upon the judgment of the hon ble supreme court in the case of union of india vs. ..... learned counsel for the petitioner also referred to another decision of the supreme court in the case of state of kerala vs. .....

Allied Blenders and Distillers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Intellectual Property App ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR2009Mad196

..... sanjay jain, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent - 3 submitted that the trade marks act is a special act, the opposition to registration is in fact a kind of a plaint, it has to be filed within the period of limitation provided under the special act in the manner prescribed and on payment of the prescribed fee as provided thereunder, and if that was not so done there was no power with the registrar to extend time and receive the cheque subsequently. ..... (we have been informed that ultimately the application for interim injunction in both the suits were rejected by a common order of the delhi high court on 11th july, 2008, and the appeal therefrom was rejected by a division bench of that court on 29th september, 2008, and the special leave petitions being special leave to appeal (civil) nos. ..... sub-section 21(7) of the act provides only for amendment of the notice of opposition and counter statement, but that cannot be construed as a provision to cure any deficiency in the requirement of sections 21(1) and 21(2) of the act. ..... that was a case concerning a suite for rendition of accounts and an error had crept up in the manner in which the valuation of the reliefs was done, which was because of the mistake of their counsel. ..... cheppilat puthanpurayil aboobacker reported in : (1995) 5 scc 5 the apex court was concerned with the special provision of limitation provided under section 18 of the kerala rent control act. .....

T.S. Rajam Ammal Vs. V.N. Swaminathan and ors.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1974Mad152

..... apart form this one difference, there is no other difference in the operative portion of the two sections.in view of this, the question for consideration will be whether the full bench judgment referred to above construing section 7(iv-a) of the court-fees act, 1870, as amended by the madras court-fees (amendment) act 1922, can be overlooked or ignored for construing section 40 of the madras court-fees and suits valuation act 1955. ..... the next feature to be observed is that though the learned judge has stated that the corresponding section in the earlier act different in certain respects from section 40 of the madras court-fees and suits valuation act, 1955, he has not actually stated in what respects the corresponding section differed from section 40 of the madras court-fees and suits valuation act, 1955.3. ..... the learned judge has stated that "i think it fruitless to refer to the conflicting authorities cited at the bar in support of either view; firstly because the ratio decidendi in each of the authorities cited must be confined to the facts of that particular case, and secondly because most of the authorities were concerned with interpreting the corresponding section in the earlier act, which in certain respects was worded differently from section 40 of the madras court-fees and suits valuation act, 1955. .....

Moulvi Abun Naser KhuthubuddIn Syed Shah Mohammed Rakher Khadiri Vs. t ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1986Mad229; (1988)IMLJ490

..... considering the question that arose for decision before the full bench, we are unable to read and understand that decision as requiring the inclusion of solatium, as part of the subject-matter of the appeal, within the meaning of section 51 of the tamil nadu court-fees and suits valuation act, 1955, and the payment of court-fee thereon. ..... it was also further pointed out that the provisions of the amended sections 23(2) and 28 of the act are made applicable to all proceedings relating to compensation pending on 30th april, 1982 or filed subsequent to the date, whether before the collector or before the court or the high court or supreme court, even if they have finally terminated before the enactment of the amending act and it would be correct to say that the amended provisions would apply in relation to an order passed by the high court or supreme court, only if the order is passed in an appeal against an award made the collector or court between 30th april, 1982 and the commencement of the amending act. ..... the sub-collector and land acquisition officer, mallapuram , took the view that the award of solatium under section 25(2) of the kerala land acquisition act was not a matter of judicial discretion, but a statutory duty and solatium had to be granted, whether the party asked for it or not, and when the court must necessarily grant the relief, it is unnecessary for the party to claim the same. ..... 803 : (1972) 1 m.l.j. .....

Dr. (Mrs.) Ruth Annamalai Vs. Mrs. Valliammai Achi, W/O of Late Dr. Al ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1991Mad284

..... before considering the legal position emerging out of the submission made by the learned counsle for both sides it is necessary to take notice of the relevant provisions in the indian succession act, tamil nadu court-fees and suits valuation act, 1955, letters patent, high court, madras and the original side rules, 1956 and certain provisions in the code of civil procedure, 1908. ..... radha-krishnan, learned counsel for the plaintiff, that a suit has necessarily to be instituted by the presentation of a plaint and must necessarily culminate in a decree, as a precondition for payment of ad valorem court-fee under schedule i of the tamil nadu court-fees and suits valuation act.27. ..... 11(k) of the tamil nadu court-fees and suits valuation act, provides that if a caveat is entered and the application is registered as a suit, one half of the scale of fee prescribed in art. ..... section 104 deals with appeals from orders (order xliii).part x of the code deals with framing of rules and their amendment and for amendment of orders in first schedule by individual high courts.section 141 of the code is as follows:--'the procedure provided in this code in regard to suits shall be followed, as far as it can be made applicable, in all proceedings in any court of civil jurisdiction. ..... 8 of 1972, dated 6-2-1973 and a judgment reported in kanni r. .....

Maheswari Metals and Metal Refinery, Bangalore Vs. the Madras State Sm ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1974Mad39

..... section 8 of the madras court-fees and suits valuation act, 1955, is clear on the point. ..... it is, i think, clear that, not being liquida causa, the set off could not be claimed under the provisions of section 111 of the code of civil procedure; and this being so, though i am prepared to allow that the set off may be admitted as an equitable protection to the defendants against being cast in the plaintiff's suit, i do not see how, failing the provisions of section 111 of the civil procedure code, the defendants, who have paid no court-fees on this account, can be allowed to recover a sum of money from the plaintiff.'32. ..... in that part of the country in which the suit was brought, act x of 1859 is still in force, and suits for rent are tried in revenue and not in civil courts, further, it appears on the face of the record that, as regards a portion of the claim for rent, the defendants' demand was barred by limitation at the time when their written statement in this suit was filed. ..... 'they refer to some of the decisions, and observe:'section 216 of the code of civil procedure, as amended by act vii of 1888, recognizes that a right of set off which would not be admissible under section 111 of the code might be otherwise admissible and that a defendant pleading it might be entitled to a decree on it as against the plaintiff.'36. ..... mills : air1968ker310 a bench of the kerala high court recognized the claim of set off. .....

Perumal Vs. Boyot Selvacarassou, Power Agent Boyot Virappin

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (2002)2MLJ150

..... it was submitted that the amendment to the pondicherry court fees and suits valuation act came into force on 1.9.1986. ..... an erroneous order of the lower court to pay higher court fee than that paid by the plaintiff will not deprive the district court of the jurisdiction to hear the appeal and unless the value of the suit is amended to affect the jurisdiction of the trial court, the value of the appeal will follow the value of the suit.8. ..... ' the learned judge declared: 'the value of the suit must be the plaint valuation and the plaint valuation is the value set on the suit by the plaintiff unless and until his valuation is amended. ..... the respondent has not accepted the valuation given by the trial court for what has been perceived as just compensation for the super-structure and though the decree may mention the additional value or what it calls the further value and the additional court fee, what the court is concerned with is the valuation given in the plaint. ..... (3) in ilr (1916) 39 madras 447 (cited supra), which also arose out of a suit from redemption of mortgage, the amount with the principal of the debt was rs.3,899/- and court fees was paid on that amount, but the trial court ordered the plaintiffs to pay court fees on the total amount payable on redemption. ..... pondicherry court fees and suit valuation act 1972 and further valued at rs.35,900/- (rs.10,800 + 25,100) and additional court fee payable rs.1883/-. .....

Muthirayar Educational Society Vs. V.Giridharan

Court : Chennai

..... she is not entitled to invoke section 25(d) and 27(c) of the pondicherry court fees and suit valuation act, 1972.25. ..... the trial court, on an appreciation of entire oral and documentary evidence available on record, has come to a resultant conclusion that the amendment dated 22.12.1998 is illegal and invalid, in regard to the amendment of rule iii(b) and the amendment of the office bearers and further held that the suit has been properly valued and correct court fees has been paid by the appellant/plaintiff. ..... the amendment of rule iii(b) of the bye-law of the society is illegal or not and in this regard, the trial court has rightly held that the amendment as well as the registration of the amendment are illegal or invalid.31.the learned counsel for the appellant/plaintiff urges before this court that the first appellate court has not considered the question whether the appointment of the 1st respondent/2nd defendant as predsident of the society gets validated before the amendment of the rule iii(b) of the bye-law is complete and indeed, the said bye-law of the society mentions that 'the founder-members shall be the .....