PLD 2023 SC 470
Ss. 148, 149 & O.VII, R.11---Court-fee s, non-payment of---Power to make up deficiency of Court-fee s---Scope---Appellant's application seeking extension of time for deposit of Court-fee was dismissed by the Appellate Court---Legality---Law requires that a court should first attend to the matter of Court-fee s---If Court-fee s is not paid the plaint may be rejected---Same principle also applies to memoranda of appeals---However, in the present case the Appellate Court adopted a course which the law did not provide; the Court allowed the appellant's appeal but made his decision subject to payment of Court-fee s within thirty days---Appellant submitted an application for enlargement of time, under sections 148, 149 and 151, C.P.C., in which he stated that he was not aware of the condition imposing Court-fee s and that due to the Covid-19 pandemic and closure of the court he was unable to make payment within the stipulated thirty days---However, his application was dismissed---Appellant had paid the Court-fee s, which had secured the interest of the State---Non-payment or belated payment of Court-fee s does not adversely affect the interest of the opposite-party---Appellate Court should not have proceeded to decide the appellant's appeal till he had paid Court-fee s---Appellant had given sufficiently valid reasons for extending the time for payment of Court-fee s, which the court could extend under sections 148 and 149 of C.P.C., therefore, his application seeking extension of time to pay Court-fee s, should have been accepted by the Appellate Court---If Court-fee s was allowed to be paid the interest of the State would have been secured, without in any manner undermining the legal rights of the opposite-party, therefore, it was not understandable why the appellant was not allowed to pay the Court-fee s, albeit belatedly---Appeal was allowed, impugned judgment of Appellate Court was set-aside with the observations that legal complications arise if a judgment is given, as in the present case, without applicable Court-fee s having been paid, and parties alter their positions pursuant thereto, for instance the appellant may have proceeded to sell the land which he had purchased and thus created third-party interest therein, which may give rise to additional litigation; that such litigation can be avoided if the matter of Court-fee s is first settled; that when courts are inundated with cases, and of those who are keen to proceed with them, it does not stand to reason to waste court-time by deciding a case in which Court-fee s has not been paid.
0 Comments