The High Court allowed an application seeking a refund of Rs.14,475/- wrongly paid by the petitioners into the High Court account for succession duty following an order clarifying double payment.
The Registry is directed to refund Rs.14,475/- paid by petitioners via Chalan No.6184511026 dated 28.09.2022 to the counsel for petitioners.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
A.No.3044 of 2023 in
O.P.No.581 of 2022
R.N.MANJULA,J.
This application has been filed to order refund of Rs.14,475/- paid to RBI, Chennai vide Lodgment Chalan No.6184511026 dated 27.09.2022 and lying in the Government credit, to Mr.A.E.Ravichandran, the counsel for the petitioners in O.P.No.581 of 2022 on the file of this Court.
2 . On 04.07.2023, this Court has passed the following order:
"The applicant is the petitioner in the Original Petition, and the Original Petition has been filed seeking for the grant of Letters of Administration in respect of the estate of one deceased A.N. Vijayakumar, who is the brother of the petitioner.
2 . It is submitted that the petitioner has to pay the Court fee of Rs.14,475/- for the Original Petition. The above-mentioned amount of Rs.14,475/- has been paid into the account of the Registrar General of the High Court Madras by getting the Lodgment Schedule signed by the Deputy Registrar Account of the High Court Madras, and the Lodgment Schedule would show that the amount has to be paid through 'P.D. Account No.I.C.C.O.S.' After remitting the said
Page No.1 of 4
amount, when the applicant produced the counterfoil of the Lodgment challan, it was objected by the Registry that the duty was paid by way of an e-court fee or along with a memo.
3. In compliance thereof, the petitioner had paid the Court fee of Rs.14,475/-/ as required by the Registry. Since the petitioner had already paid a sum of Rs.14,475/- by getting Lodgment challan to the account of the High Court, he is entitled to get the refund of Rs.14,475/-, which was wrongly remitted into the account of the High Court by way of Lodgment challan No. 6184511026 dated 27.09.2022.
4 . Hence, the Registry is directed to clarify whether there is double payment made and whether the petitioner has paid the court fee after remitting the amount through the Lodgment Challan in the account of the High Court.
5 . List the matter on 17.7.2023."
3. In view of the above direction, the Registry has made an
endorsement that Succession Duty of Rs.15,000/- has been paid on 15.12.2022 and Duty of Rs.14,475/- was paid by way of RBI Challan on 28.09.2022.
Page No.2 of 4
4.
4. In view of the above endorsement made by the Registry, this
application is allowed and the Registry is directed to refund Rs.14,475/paid by the petitioners vide Lodgment Chalan No.6184511026 dated
28.09.2022, to the learned counsel for the petitioners.
17.07.2023
gsk
Page No.3 of 4
R.N.MANJULA,J.
gsk
A.No.3044 of 2023 in O.P.No.581 of 2022
17.07.2023
Page No.4 of 4
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to a refund of Rs.14,475/- paid towards succession duty which was erroneously remitted to the High Court. exemplary
Whether the Registry is directed to issue the refund to the counsel for the petitioners.
Petitioners
Registry of High Court Madras
R.N.MANJULA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
