High Court of Madras
Case Law Search
Swamy Sadananda v. State of Tamil Nadu, rep. by its - W.A. No.935 OF 2001  RD-TN 562 (6 August 2002)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THE HON'BLE MR B.SUBHASHAN REDDY, THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.GOVINDARAJAN
W.P. MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No. 50349 of 2002 in
WP.34049 of 2002
CITIZEN CONSUMER & CIVIC ACTION [ PETITIONER] ACTION GROUP REP BY ITS TRUSTEE
GOVERNMENT OF TAMILNADU REP BY [ RESPONDENTS ] ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
R- 2 THE GOVERNMENT OF TAMILNADU,
REP BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT LAW DEPARTMENT,SECRETARIAT,
R- 3 TAMIL NADU LAW COMMISSION,
REP BY ITS CHAIRMAN,
6TH FLOOR, EVK SAMPATH MAALIGAI, COLLEGE ROAD, CHENNAI.6.
Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to stay the operation of the Tamil Nadu Court Fees and Suits Valuation (Amendment) Ordinance/ 2002 pending WP.34049/2002.
This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of MR.R.SRIRAM PANCHU, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR MR.G.ANBUMANI, ADVOCATE for the petitioner and of MR.N.R.CHANDRAN, ADVOCATE GENERAL on behalf of the respondents, the court made the following order :- In the above interlocutory applications learned counsel for the petitioners had finished their agruments by 3.15 pm on 30.08.2002 and the learned Advocate General had started his arguments and spilled over to this day and the learned Advocate General continued his arguments in the morning of this day and sought for pass over till after lunch for further arguments. After lunch, learned Advocate General submits that the Hon'ble Chief Minister through the Chief Secretary has communicated to him that the Government has decided to suspend the Tamil Nadu Ordinance No.4 of 2002 and to appoint a committee to go into the Court-fees hike structure and then to re-consider the matter after submission of the report, but subject to the condition that the Court-fees so far paid pursuant to the Ordinance shall not be claimed pending further orders. In the circumstances, no further orders are necessary, for the present, in these interlocutory applications except recording the above statement of the learned Advocate General. It is made clear that the enhanced Court-fee, which has been paid pursuant to the impugned Ordinance, shall not be refunded until further orders of this court. Further the matters in which the enhanced Court-fee has not been paid, but struck up, shall be treated as valid provided the Pre-ordinance Court-fee has been paid. It is further clarified that neither there should be refund of the Court-fee paid under the Ordinance nor there should be any recovery pursuant to the Ordinance. Post the W.P.M.Ps. after Dasara Vacation.
1 THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT 2 THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT REVENUE DEPARTMENT LAW DEPARTMENT, FORT ST FORT ST GEORGE GEORGE, CHENNAI CHENNAI
3 THE CHAIRMAN, TAMILNADU
LAW COMMISSION, 6TH FLOOR
EVK SAMPATH MALIGAI, COLLEGE
WPMP.50349 of 2002
WP.34049 of 2002
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.