Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
M.Venkataram Naikvenkatesh Naik, vs Vadithya Sreeram Naik, on 8 November, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
***
Civil Revision Petition No.1834 of 2022
Between:
M. Venkataram Naik @ Venkatesh Naik
.... Petitioner
And
Vadithya Sreeram Naik.
....Respondent.
Date of Order pronounced on : 08.11.2024
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers : Yes/No
may be allowed to see the judgments?
2.Whether the copies of judgment may be marked : Yes/No
to Law Reporters/Journals:
3.Whether the Lordship wishes to see the fair copy : Yes/No
of the Judgment?
_________________________
JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
2
* THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
+ CRP No. 1834 of 2022
% 08.11.2024
# M. Venkataram Naik @ Venkatesh Naik
.... Petitioner
And
Vadithya Sreeram Naik.
.
....Respondent.
! Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri Seelam Krishna Reddy
Counsel for the Respondent: Sri V. Nitesh
<Gist :
>Head Note:
? Cases referred:
1) 2018 (2) ALT 198
3
APHC010399992022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
[3460
AT AMARAVATI
]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY ,THE EIGHTH DAY OF NOVEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1834/2022
Between:
M.Venkataram Naik@Venkatesh Naik, ...PETITIONER
AND
Vadithya Sreeram Naik ...RESPONDENT
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1 S KRISHNA REDDY
.
Counsel for the Respondent:
1 V NITESH
.
The Court made the following:
4
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
Civil Revision Petition No.1834 of 2022
ORDER:
1. The Civil Revision Petition is filed aggrieved by the Order dated
30.06.2022 in C.F.No.563 of 2022 in O.S.No.-- of 2022 passed by the
Junior Civil Judge, Puttaparthy, Ananthapuram District.
2. The Petitioner is the Plaintiff belonging to Schedule Tribe Community.
A suit was filed for recovery of money said to have been given by the
Petitioner to the respondent pursuant to an Agreement of Sale dated
10.03.2018 for an amount of Rs.5,80,000/- said to have been given by the
petitioner to the respondent under Agreement of Sale dated 10.03.2018
with regard to the suit schedule property. It is the contention of the
Petitioner that though an agreement of sale was executed, the Respondent
was evading to execute Registered Sale Deed by postponing the same on
some pretext or the other. In that view, the petitioner sought for refund of
the sale consideration with interest. As the same was not being paid, the
said suit was filed for recovery of the suit amount with costs and future
interests.
3. The suit was filed without paying Court Fee and exemption was
sought on the ground that the Petitioner belongs to Schedule Tribes
Community. The Petitioner relied on G.O.Ms.No.381, dated 20.03.1968,
issued in exercise of the power under Section 68 of the Andhra Pradesh
Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1956 ( for short ' the Act, 1956'),
exempting the members of the Schedule Tribes Community from payment
of Court Fee. The trial Court relying on a Judgment of this Court in the case
of Kopparthi Krishnamurthy V District Legal Services Authority and
Others1 rejected the plea of the Petitioner for exemption. Challenging the
same, the present Civil Revision Petition is filed.
4. Heard Sri S. Krishna Reddy, learned counsel for the Petitioner, and
Sri V. Nitesh, learned counsel for the Respondent.
5. As per the A.P.Court Fee And Suit Valuation Act, 1956, the
Government is entitled to exempt certain classes of persons from paying
Court Fee under Section 68 of the Act. The Section 68 reads as under;
68. Power to reduce or remit fees.
"The State Government may, by notification in the Andhra
Pradesh Gazette, reduce or remit, in the whole or in any part of
the territory of his State, or any of the fees chargeable under this
Act, and may, in like manner, cancel or vary such notification".
2018 (2) ALT 198
6. In exercise of power thereunder, G.O.Ms.No.381 was issued by the
Government exempting the members of the Scheduled Tribes from paying
the Court Fee. The G.O.Ms No.381 reads as under;
" GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
ABSTRACT
ANDHRA COURT FEES AND SUITS VALUATION ACT, 1956- Civil
Suits/ by Scheduled Tribes - Remission of Court Fees - Notification
issued .
----------
HOME ( COURTS.A) DEPARTMENT
G.O.Ms.No.381 Dated the 20th March, 1968.
Read the following:
1. From the Collector, Khammam, R.C.No.D1.1099/65,
dt. 3.3.65.
2. From the Inspector General, o/o Registrar & Stamps
Letter No.S1.19628/dated 26.03.1966.
3. From the Director of Social Welfare, Rc.No.10793/65.II,
Dated 31.03.1965.
4. From the Board of Revenue, L.Dis.2573/Q/65,
dt.18.4.1966
5. From the Registrar, High Court, Roc.No.817/66,
dt.--.8.1966
---------
ORDER:
The following notification will be published in the Andhra Pradesh
Gazette:-
NOTIFICATION:
In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 68 of the Andhra
Pradesh Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1956 (Act VII of 1956), the
Governor of Andhra Pradesh hereby remits in the whole of the State of
Andhra Pradesh, the fees chargeable under the said Act in respect of
Civil Suits - instituted by persons belonging to scheduled tribes.
G.M. Ahmed,
Joint Secretary to Government"
7. The power to reduce or remit the Court Fee is provided under 68 of
the Act. Pursuant thereto, exemption from paying Court Fee in respect of
the suit instituted by persons belonging to the Schedule Tribes was issued.
Once the state had granted statutory exemption for payment of court fee in
exercise of power specifically under the Act to a certain class of persons,
the same would prevail till it is rescined or modified under the Act in
exercise of power under Section 68 of the Act.
8. The trial court reliance on the judgment of this court Kopparthi
Krishnamurthy's appears to be misplaced as the G.O.Ms.No.381 did not
fall for consideration therein. In that case, the petitioner was an agriculturist
and not a member belonging to scheduled tribe community and WP was
filed questioning the refusal by the Mandal Legal services to issue court fee
exemption certificate. In was in that context, this Hon'ble Court held that
there is no general power to issue exemption of court fee to
Mandal/District/State legal services authority under the Act. It was held that
on application for legal services under section 12, If the concerned Legal
Services Authority is satisfied that such a person satisfies the criteria
specified in Section 12 of the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987, then it
may be open to the concerned authority to invoke the stipulations contained
in the Government order G.O.Ms. No. 73 Law dated 19.06.2007 issued in
exercise of the powers conferred by Section 68 of the A.P. Court Fees and
Suits Valuation Act, 1956, subject, however, to the conditions stipulated in
the said Government Order.
9. Therefore, this Court is inclined to interfere with the order passed by the
trial Court and the Civil Revision Petition is liable to be allowed.
10. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed and the Order dated
30.06.2022 in C.F.No.563 of 2022 in O.S.No.--- of 2022 passed by the
Junior Civil Judge, Puttaparthy, Ananthapuram District, is set aside. No
order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous Petition, if any, pending shall
stand closed.
__________________
NYAPATHY VIJAY, J
Date: 8.11.2024
Note: LR copy be marked.
B/o
eha
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
CRP NO.1834 of 2022
Dt. 8.11.2024
eha
