HQN'BLB MR, ABHAY MAMOHAR SABRB v. Chhattisgarh Elcctricity Board

HQN'BLB MR, ABHAY MAMOHAR SABRB & HOM'BLE MR. G. MINHAJUDDIN^JJ. APPELLANTS/ &PPLIC&SST8 RE8POMDBMTS M.C.C. N0. 19201'* 2005 Sint. STUTIJ Bai & ofhcrs Versus Chhattisgarh Elcctricity Board & otheis Present: Mr. Sudhir Agrawal, Advoeate for appeUaats. Per Abhay Manohar Sapre, J. ORDER <0ral) {Passed on 30-08-2012) •• This is an application aiade by the appellants (plaintiffs) uader Order 44 Rule 1 of thc Code of Civil Procedure fCPC' for short). By fhis appUcation, a prayer is laade to allow fhe appeBaats to file First Appeal zmder Section 96 of the CPC against the judgnient and decree dated 25.4.2005 passed by in Civil Suit Third Additional District Judge, Bilaspur No.4-B/2003, wifhout paynieat of ad valorem court fees on fhe aieiuorandum of appeal. It is not in dispute that the plaintiffs (appeBants hweui) 2. were aUowed to suc and prosecute their Civfl Sult, outofwhich fhis appeal/application arises, as mdigent person by fhe trial Court. It is also not ia dispute that the appeUants have filed au affidavit im support of this appUcation as required uuder Order 44 Rule 3 ofthe CPC stating ftierein that they have not acquired any asset alter passiug ofthe iiapugned Judgnient and dccrce tiU liling of the present appUcation aad ttiat they. coatinue to be indlgent person tbereby entitled to get exeinptlon Qxas. payment of ad valorem. court fees. In other words, accoidiag to appeUants, they continue to be iudigent person fix>m tfae date of fiUng of fhe suit tfll date with no change in fheir financial capacily diiring the mtervenjmg period which reinam fhe same as what it was at the time of filing of suit. -•>. ":\ '"^^^ • ^- ^' '^T?^-^ ^

3. Accordiag to the appcUauts (pteintiffs), fhey are also entifled to teikc benefit ofexemption Notification No. F.No.9-2-86- B-XXI dated 2nd August, 1986 issued by fhe State under Section 35 of fhe Court Fees Act, which exeanpts in whole fhe payment of dd vaJorem court fees payable on the meinorauduin of appeal if such appeal arises out ofa claha made by the plaiatifiyclaunant tbr claiming compensatiou for thc deafh of any meinber of his family.

4. as under:- and in suppressiou of The Notification, ia question, is «[891.NotlHcation F.N0.9-2-86-B-XXI, dated the 2nd Aujpist, 1986 - In exercise of the powers confcrred by Section 3S of the Court Fees Act, t870 (No.7 of the Department 1870) Notification No.F. 9-1-84-B-XXI, dated the 29ih Dccciuber 1984, the State Govemment hereby remits ia w&ole tfae Court Fees mentioned in Article 1-A of the Firet Schedule and Articles 1, II aad 11-A ofthe Sccond Schedule payablc on a plalat, appeal, re'sisioa ot aay other dadm, scs tbe case may be, presented by a person for coinpensation for,- (i) (i^ (iu) (iv) (v) any damage or iajuiy caused to him or aay member ofhis fauuly; or fhe dcath of aigr lueinber of his famUy; or any damage caused to him or mexaber of his faErily's property; or any dainage, iujury to, or death of a oitizen of India; or caused a aad/or establistunent, Corporation, iindertakmg, associatfon, departinent and any other juifetic persoii; daxnage oii account of enviroiunental, vegetational, ecological water and such other poUutions caused by thc operation in an iudustry fhrough lcakage or cscape of aay daageious gases, vapours, fumes or dust fiom any part ofthe plaafc Ejqj1anation,-FoT purposes noti&cation,- (i) (ii) 'person' shall include fhe Goveramcnt of India; and 'famfly' iaclude, husband, wife, uunor son, uiunarried daugbter or any relation by blood wholty dependent on the claunant. ^

5. It is contended by the appeUants (pteintiffs) fhat the suit out ofwhich tbis appeal/application arises was tfae suit fited by the appeUauts clauniug coinpensation fbr the dcafh of one ineinber of Cheir fainjly ^auast fbc respondcat aud ftieiiefore ia fhis appeal/application, fhc appeUants would bc entitled to Glaiin beneflt of albreiuentioned Notification in paymcnt of ad vatorem court fees on ffae meiaorandum ofappeal.

6. It is not iu dispute fhat ttais appeal/applicatiou arises out fited by ttte appeUants (plamtifls) claimuig compensation fiioiu fhe respondcnt for fhe deafh of one of tlie inember offheir tanuly wlio died due to.electrocution. It is not the case of fhe State that exenaption notification has since been withdrawn or/aad that it is no longer in force. In other words, it is veiy niuch in force and hence the appeUants aae eatitted to claiia its benefit in payment of ad. valorem court fees.

7. In the teht of foregoing discussioxt, ttie application is aUowed. The appeUants are pennitted to ffle the Flrst AppBal uuder Section 96 of the CPC against the impug&ed judgment aad decree dated 25.4.2005 passed by Third Addidonat Distdct Judge, Bilaspiu- in CivU Suit No.4-B/2003 without payiuent ot ad valorem, court fees.

8. The Registty is, accordiagly, directed to tBgister aforesaid Ftrst Appeal by allottiag new number aad then list the First Appeal tbr orders before appropriate Bench.

9. A copy of this order be kept ia fhe ffle of First Appeal for information and record.

10. Let fhis be done wittun a week aad the newty registered Pirst Appeal be listed for orders on aduussion after 2 weeks. No cost / sd/- A (Abhay Maaohar Sapre) JUDGE Sd/- (G. imialu^uddiB) JUD6B