Case Note & Summary
The plaintiff, Uday Singh Deshraj Rajput, filed Suit (L) No. 967 of 2013 in the Bombay High Court on 11 November 2013 seeking a declaration that he was the owner of the script and screenplay of the film Krrish-3 and that the defendants, Film Craft Production (India) Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., were not entitled to use the script. At the time of filing, the plaintiff did not pay the requisite court fee. The plaintiff's advocate made an endorsement on 26 October 2013 stating that the plaintiff resided in a remote village in Madhya Pradesh and urgently needed to file the suit as the film was to be released soon. The Prothonotary and Senior Master granted two weeks' time to pay the court fee. On 29 October 2013, the plaintiff moved an application for urgent ad-interim relief to restrain the release of the film on 1 November 2013, which was rejected by a reasoned order. On 7 March 2014, when the suit was called for directions, no one appeared for the plaintiff, and the suit was dismissed for want of prosecution. Almost a year later, the court noticed that the plaintiff had not paid the court fee. On 24 June 2015, the court directed the plaintiff's advocate, Ms. Rekha K. Mehta, to appear. She appeared on 29 July 2015 and undertook to collect and deposit the deficit court fee of Rs.2,50,000 within two weeks. However, she repeatedly sought time and ultimately informed the court that she was unable to contact the plaintiff. The court noted that the plaintiff had not paid the court fee and had not prosecuted the suit. The court dismissed the suit for non-prosecution and non-payment of court fees, holding that the plaintiff's conduct amounted to an abuse of the process of the court.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Court Fees - Non-Payment - Suit filed without requisite court fee, plaintiff granted time to pay but failed - Court dismissed suit for want of prosecution and non-payment - Held that plaintiff's failure to pay court fee and prosecute suit amounts to abuse of process (Paras 1-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the suit should be dismissed for non-prosecution and non-payment of court fees?
Final Decision
The suit is dismissed for non-prosecution and non-payment of court fees. The plaintiff's advocate's undertaking to pay court fee is noted but not enforced as the suit is dismissed.
Law Points
- Court fees must be paid at the time of filing suit
- failure to pay leads to dismissal
- undertaking to pay court fee is binding
- suit dismissed for want of prosecution if plaintiff fails to appear
