9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 152X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ate of Rs. 50 in other cases. This notification further provides that the amount so collected shall be credited to the Kerala Legal Benefit Fund constituted under sub-section (2) of Section 76 of the CF Act. The main contention of the appellants was that the aforesaid levy is in the nature of compulsory exaction/tax and the element of service/quid pro quo was absent and, therefore, such a fee cannot be charged. The High Court has repelled the challenge thereby upholding the validity of the said notification following its earlier judgment in Chackolas Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd. v. State of Kerala, 2006 (1) KLT 989, vide its judgment dated July 13, 2007. This judgment of the High Court is challenged in this appeal on the same grounds. Subject matter of the two writ petitions is also identical. 2) Before coming to the detailed submissions in this behalf, it would be apposite to take note of the relevant provisions of the CF Act as well as terms of the notification dated April 05, 2002. 3) The CF Act relates to court fees and valuation of suits in the State of Kerala. The court fee calculated as per the provision of the said Act has to be paid in respect of various kinds of procee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... language of the aforesaid Section, this provision empowers the State Government to levy an additional court fee in respect of appeals or revisions to tribunals or appellate authorities, other than civil and criminal courts. This can be done by notification in the Gazette. The upper limit of such an additional court fee is one per cent of the amount involved in the dispute in cases where it is capable of valuation, and in other cases the additional court fee which can be levied is not to exceed rupees hundred for each appeal or revision. This levy of additional court fee is meant for Legal Benefit Fund. This Fund is to be applied and utilised for the purpose of providing an efficient legal service for the people of the State and to provide social security measures for the legal profession. The mode and manner in which legal services are to be made more efficient and social security measures for legal profession need to be provided can be prescribed by rules made by the Government. For this purpose, the State Government has framed the Kerala Legal Benefit Fund Rules, 1991, These Rules prescribed the manner in which the Fund is to be operated. Rule 3 thereof enumerates the sources of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... contribution made by the Bar Council; (c) any voluntary donation or contribution made to the Fund by the Bar Council of India, any Bar Association, any other association or institution, any advocate or any other person; (d) any grant made by the State Government to the Fund; (e) the amount set apart from the Legal Benefit Fund constituted under sub-section (2) of Section 76 of the Kerala Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1959 (10 of 1960), for providing social security measures for the legal profession; (f) any sum borrowed under section 10; (g) all sums received from the Life Insurance Corporation of India on the death of an advocate under the Group Insurance Policy; (h) any profit or dividend received from the Life Insurance Corporation of India in respect of policies of Group Insurance of the members of the Fund; (i) any interest or dividend or other return on any investment made of any part of the Fund; (j) all sums collected by way of sale of stamps under section 22; (k) all sums collected under section 15 by way of application fees and annual subscriptions and interest thereon. (3) The sums specified in sub section (2) shall be paid or collecte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... quent level of statutory appeal and revision as well. 10) The aforesaid arguments of the appellants is devoid of any merit. Insofar as the argument predicated on fee vis-a-vis tax is concerned, i.e. the submission that the imposition in question is in the nature of tax inasmuch as this imposition has no nexus to any object sought to be achieved in relation to the service available to the appellants and there is no quid pro quo, the same is dealt with by the High Court elaborately. The High Court has referred to Entry 3 in List II (State List) of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution as it stood in the year 1960 when the CF Act was enacted on receiving the assent of the President of India. This Entry reads as under: "3. Administration of justice, constitution and organization of all courts except the Supreme Court and the High Court; officers and servants of the High Court; procedure in Rent and Revenue Courts; fees taken in all courts except to the Supreme Court." By the Forty-Second Amendment to the Constitution in the year 1976, administration of justice became a Concurrent Subject, having been included as Entry 11A in List III which resulted in requisite modification to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
