ORDER
1. This is an application on behalf of the appellants for the grant of a certificate for renewal or refund of the value of stamps worth Rs. 1,627-8-0 used on a memorandum of appeal which was returned to the appellants by the order of this Court dated 22nd November 1922, because the memorandum of appeal was not properly stamped.
2. An application was made to the Collector of Patna for renewal or refund of the stamps used on the memorandum of appeal, but he refused the application by his order of the 6th of December 1922.
3. The appellants then moved the Commissioner, who by his order of the nth of January 1923 directed the petitioners to obtain a necessary certificate for renewal from the Taxing Officer of this Court. Hence the application to this Court, and the matter has been referred to us by the Taxing Officer. According to the view of the Stamp Reporter the case is not governed by any rule, and that Rule 23 does not apply inasmuch as that rule is applicable only to fees chargeable under Section 3 of the Act and the memorandum of appeal in the present case does not come under that Section. Even if there be no rule, this Court has inherent power under Section 151 of the Code of. Civil Procedure to grant the certificate asked for, as was held in the case of Chandra Hart Singh v. Tipan Prosad Singh 46 Ind. Cas. 271 : 3 P.L.J. 452 : (1918) Pat. 273. That decision was based upon the decision of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Hari Har Guru v. Ananda Mahanty 20 Ind. Cas. 498 : 40 C. 365. No doubt, a different view has been taken in the Allahabad High Court, but, in our opinion, we should follow the decision of this Court and the Calcutta High Court where the practice seems to have grown up from the earliest time: vide In re Grant 14 W.R. 47.
4. We, therefore, direct that the certificate asked for be granted by the Taxing Officer of this Court.