Find a Lawyer

M. C. A. No. 17 of 1985, decided on 10th March, 1.986.

S.4‑Dastoor‑ul‑Amal Diwani Kalat, S. 15‑Court Fees Act (VII of.1870), S. 1‑Effect of S. 4 of Ordinance XXI of 1960 on S. 15; Dastoor‑ul‑Amal Diwani, Kalat in matters of court‑fee Provisions of S. 15, Dastoor‑ul‑Amal Diwani, Kalat, held, were repealed and replaced by provisions of Court Fees Act, 1870 by virtue of S. 4, Ordinance XX1 of 1960‑Court‑fees in special areas of Kalat would now be regulated by provisions of Court Fees Act, 1870 instead of Dastoor‑ul‑Amal, Diwani, Kalat.

Azizullah Memon for Appellants.

Haji Sarfraz Khan for. Respondents.

Sultan Mahmood for A.‑G. on Court's Notice.

Date of hearing : 9th March, 1986.

This appeal is directed against the order, dated 21‑3‑1985 passed by Majlis‑e‑Shoora,‑Quetta Division whereby they had directed. the appellants to pay court‑fee at the rate of 11i on the plaint as provided in section 15 of Dastoor‑ul‑Amal Diwani, Kalat.

2. The facts giving rise to this appeal are that the appellants had filed suit under Baluchistan Civil Disputes (Shariat Application) Regulation, 1976 before the Court of Majlis‑e‑Shoora, Quetta in respect of property situated in Dalbandin; District Chagai, the Special Areas of Baluchistan. The Majlis‑e‑Shoora directed them to, pay the court‑fee as provided under section 15 of Dastoor‑ul‑Amal Diwani‑Kalat and rule 6 of Baluchistan Civil Disputes (Shariat Application) Rules, 1977, whereby the court‑fee and process fee before the Court of Qazi and Majlis‑e‑Shoora were to be levied according to provisions of Dastur‑ul‑Amal Diwani, Kalat. The both provisions of law are reproduced here for better understanding of the appeal :‑ .

6. Court‑fees.‑Court‑fee and process fee by the Courts of Qazi and Majlis‑e‑Shura shall be levied according to the provisions of Dastur ul‑Amal Diwani of Kalat."

It was vehemently argued that section 15 of the Dastoor‑ul‑Amal Diwani, Kalat has been repealed under the Central Laws (Statute Reforms) Ordi nance, 1960 and provisions of the Court Fees Act substituted the abovesaid provision of law. The law is reproduced as under :‑

"S.4. Repeal and re‑enactment of certain laws in force in certain Acceding States before their incorporation into West Pakistan.‑(1) Subject always to the provisions of section (2) of section 3, where the operation of any Central Act, or Ordinance has been extended by an amendment indicated in the Second Schedule to any area which, before the fourteenth day of October, 1955, formed part of the territories of an Acceding State, any law in force in that area before that date and corresponding to the provisions of such Act or Ordinance shall stand repealed, and shall be deemed to have been re‑enacted by such Act or Ordinance, as amended by this Ordinance, as if such law were a Central Act, and the provisions of the General Clauses Act, 1897 (X.of 1897), shall apply accordingly.

(2) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (1), anything done, action taken, right accrued, or liability, penalty, forfeiture or punishment incurred, under any such law as aforesaid during the period commencing on the fourteenth day of October, 1955, and ending with the commencement of this Ordinance, shall be deemed to have been validly done, taken, accrued or incurred, as the case may be, and the Central Act or Ordinance by which such law is deemed to have been re‑enacted shall, to that extent, be deemed not to have come into force during the said period in the area to which such law applied immediately before the commencement of this Ordinance."

"Court fees Act VII of 1870

1. In section 1, for the words "all the Provinces and Capital of the Federation" the words "the whole of Pakistan" shall be sub stituted."

3. In support of his proposition reliance was placed upon the cases P L D 1962 Quetta 82 and P L D 1973 Quetta 43. However, the respondent disputed the contentions raised by the appellants. The perusal of section 4 of the Amending Ordinance of 1960 and the authorities referred to herein above make it crystal clear that section 15 of Dastoor‑ul‑Amal Diwani, Kalat stands repealed and replaced by the Provisions of Court‑Fees Act of 1870 which law has been made applicable even before the enforcement of above Central Statute in the abovesaid Special Areas. Being such position of law I accept the appeal and set aside the order of the learned Majlis‑e‑Shoora and hold that the court‑fee in the area is regulated by the Court‑Fees Act of 1870 as amended time to time and the petitioner is directed to pay court‑fee at the rate of Rs. 7 %. The parties to blear their own costs of the proceedings.

4. This is the reasoning of my short order announced in Court on 9‑3‑1986.

A. A. Appeal allowed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.