Delhi High Court: Writing down a hefty 531 pages long judgment, discussing the validity the Court Fees (Delhi Amendment) Act, 2012 which sought to amend the Court Fees Act, 1870 in order to hike the Court Fees, the 2-judge bench of Hon’ble Gita Mittal and J.R. Mirdha, JJ struck down the Act as Delhi Legislative Assembly was not empowered to amend a Central Statute as per Article 239AA of the Constitution and even if it is held that it was legislatively competent to do so, it violated the constitutional mandate providing for the legislative procedure to amend the Central Statute. Considering the fact that the State Government was unable to provide any justification for the exorbitant hike in the court fees, the Court held that the said Act disproportionately impacts the fundamental right of access to justice under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and has a deleterious impact on litigation in courts. The court, holding that the impugned Act is unconstitutional as it adversely impacts the Part III rights as well as violates the Directive Principles of State Policy under Article 38 and 39A of the Constitution, said that the aid Act is an absolute entry point financial barrier to the courts for not only the below poverty line persons but also those who are on border line. The impugned Act had created two classes of litigants i.e. one, who will pay fixed court fees and second, who will pay court fee on ad valorem basis, without a maximum limit. The Court held that the levy has a discriminatory impact on the litigants; the same is based on no intelligible differentia and is constitutionally impermissible classification. [Delhi High Court Bar Association v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi, WP (C) No. 4770/2012, decided on October 9, 2013]
Posted on: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:12:10 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015