# until there is a certainty that the copy will be granted

- **Citation:** C.L.No.18/67-1(8)
- **Court:** Allahabad High Court
- **Decided:** 1973-02-19
- **Case number:** C.L.No.18/67-1(8)
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/until-there-is-a-certainty-that-the-copy-will-be-granted-163830
- **Pages:** 1

## Text

453
They should, therefore, be punched at the time of issue of copy and that where an
application for copy is rejected such copy folios and labels should be returned to the party
concerned unpunched.

Court fee labels surcharged ―For copies only‖ may be accepted to complete the
payment for copies issued on copy folios but they should not be affixed to the copy folio
until there is a certainty that the copy will be granted.

In the case of loose copy labels filed in order to make up the copying fee in
certain cases, the amended rule shall apply and such labels shall be punched as soon as
they are filed. In case they have to be returned on account of the application for copy
being rejected, or for some other reason, the party concerned can, under para 1357 of the
Revenue Manual, claim a refund of the value of such labels after deduction of 6 n.p
(Re.0.06) in a rupee or fraction thereof. The cancellation order should be written in red
ink ―Cancelled‖. This is to ensure that the labels are not used again.

In affixing the labels, care must be taken to ensure that the head on the label is
nearest the edge of the folio. This is to ensure that no written or typed matter is defaced if
the label is punched. In no circumstances should an adhesive stamp be affixed in the
centre of the folio.
 Cancellation of impressed stamps
G.L.No. 12/VIII-b-149 dated 13th April, 1949
Impressed stamps on probate, letters of administration, certificates, or copies
should not be punched when probate, letters of administration, certificates and copies are
issued. They may, however, be defaced by the use of a rubber stamp mentioned in rule
254 of the Stamp Rules as provided in rule 252(b) of the said rules.
No court-fees payable under rule 159(i) General Rules (Civil)
C.L.No.18/67-1(8) dated 24th April, 1939
No duty under the Stamp Act or the Court Fees Act is payable in respect of a copy
filed under rule 159(i) of General Rules (Civil), 1957.
C.L.No.45/VIII-b-151 dated 23rd May, 1973
Directions contained in letter no. 3/Stamps-978(2), dated February 19, 1973, of
the Inspector General of Stamps may be strictly followed so that use of forged court fee
stamps or fraudulent reuse thereof may be prevented.
(ii)
Deficiency
C.L.No. 22/180-20(5) dated 2nd March, 1936
It is the duty of the presiding officer of each court to take proper steps to ensure
that the inspection note of the Inspector of Stamps is laid before him without delay.
C.L.No. 27/VII-f-26 dated 10th March, 1953

Attention of all presiding officers is invited to the mandatory nature of the
provisions contained in sub-section (3) of section 6 of the Court Fees Act, 1870
according to which the question as to deficiency in court-fee raised by Inspector of
Stamps has to be decided by the court before proceeding further with the case.