JUDGMENT
Pradipta Ray, J.
1. Petitioner, a lady, has filed an application for grant of Succession Certificate under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925. In view of Notification No. SRO 575/94 dated June 7, 1994 issued by the Law Department and published in Extra Ordinary Orissa Gazette on June 10, 1994 she being a woman, was exempted from depositing the sum as it is required to be deposited under Section 379 of the Indian Succession Act (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”). Subsequently Trial Court reconsidered the order granting exemption and by order dated February 17, 1977 directed the petitioner to deposit the necessary sum holding that the aforesaid Government Notification dated June 7, 1994 does not exempt deposit of a sum as required under Section 379 of the Act. Petitioner has challenged the said judgment and order dated February 17, 1997 in this revision.
2. By the Notification dated June 7, 1994 the State Government has remitted in the whole of the State of Orissa all fees mentioned in Schedules I and II of the Court Fees Act, 1870 payable for filing or instituting cases or proceedings in any Court in Orissa by the categories of persons mentioned in the Notification. All women belong to one such categories which have been given benefit of such exemption. Article 12 to Schedule I of the Court Fees Act, 1870 prescribes the court-fees to be paid on certificate under the Act. No court-fee has been prescribed under the Court Fees Act for filing an application under Section 372 of the Act. However, Section 379 of the Act has provided : –
“379. Mode of collecting court-fees on Certificates –
(1) Every application for a certificate or for the extension of a certificate shall be accompanied by a deposit of a sum equal to the fee payable under the Court-fees Act, 1870, in respect of the certificate or extension applied for.
(2) If the application is allowed the sum deposited by the applicant shall be expanded, under the direction of the Judge, in the purchase of the stamp to be used for denoting the fees payable as aforesaid.
(3) Any sum received under Sub-section (1) and not expanded under Sub-section (2) shall be refunded to the person who deposited it”.
3. It appears, Section 379 of the Act requires deposit of a sum equal to the fee payable under the Court-fees Act on the total claim amount/aggregate value of the claims for which succession certificate is applied. Sub-section (2) and Sub-section (3) of Section 379 make it clear that in case the certificate is not granted, the entire deposited amount will be refunded or where certificate is granted the required court-fee payable on the certificate will be purchased out of the deposited sum and balance, if any, will be refunded. It is thus clear from the provisions of Section 379 of the Act that sum required to be deposited is not court-fee payable on the application for succession certificate. If it were court-fee payable for filing an application for succession certificate it would not have been refunded in the case of rejection of the Certificate or grant of certificate for a part of the claim. Section 379 of the Act prescribes a mode for collecting fee on succession certificate in advance and the deposit is required only to secure payment of court-fee if the succession certificate is issued.
4. Similar views have been expressed by the Allahabad High Court and the Kerala High Court in the respective decisions reported in AIR 1935 Allahabad 735 (Mt. Ehatishasmunnisa and Anr. v. Mir Hadi Ali and Ors.) and 1950 Kerala Law Times 560 (In re Seetahlakshmi and Ors.).
In the aforesaid decisions it has been held that what is required to be paid under Section 379 of the Act cannot be considered to be court fee payable on the application for a succession certificate.
5. Mr. Mishra, appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the amount required to be deposited under Section 379 of the Act is for the purpose of purchasing court-fee prescribed under Article 12 to Schedule I of the Court-Fees Act and the notification dated June 7, 1994 exempts all women from paying such fees. According to Mr. Mishra, it is immaterial whether it is a fee payable on the application for succession certificate or on the succession certificate. Mr. Misra’s submission cannot be accepted in view of express language used in the notification dated June 7, 1994. By the said notification State Government has exempted only those fees mentioned in Schedules I and II of the Court-Fees Act which are payable for filing or instituting cases or proceedings in any Court, The fee payable under Article 12 to Schedule I of the Court-Fees Act not being a fee for the purpose of filing or instituting a case for obtaining certificate, it is not covered by the said notification.
6. Mr. Misra has referred to a decision reported in AIR 1986 SC 1499 (Girdhari Lal and Sons v. Balbir Nath Mathur and Ors.) and has invited this Court to put a liberal and beneficent construction on the words used in the notification.
7. Golden rule on construction is that where the words used is plain and unambiguous the Court should give effect to the plain meaning of those plain words. In Giridhari Lal’s case (supra) the Supreme Court made a departure from the earlier view to stress the need, in appropriate cases, to ascertain the intention of the legislature in construing the words of Statute. In the present case the words used in the notification are so clear that those do not leave any room for any ambiguity or doubt. If State Government had any such intention to exempt all fees prescribed under Schedules I and II of the Court-Fees Act, it would not have used the qualifying words “for filing or instituting cases or proceedings. The intention of the State Government has been clearly conveyed through the words used and it is not possible to accept the submission that the notification has intended to exempt all Court fees under Article 12 to Schedule I of the Court-Fees Act.
8. For the foregoing reasons, the Revision is dismissed. The petitioner is directed to make deposit as required under Section 379 of the Act within a period of two months from the date of this judgment and upon such deposit the Court below will pass necessary orders on the petitioner’s application for succession certificate.
There is no order as to costs.
Let this order be communicated and the Records be sent down without any delay.