Separate court-fee liability in common writ petitions where each petitioner has an independent cause of action

Multiple petitioners challenging the same taxing provision in a common writ petition remained liable for separate court-fees because each carried on an independent liquor vending business and had a distinct cause of action. The writ rules allowed joinder on a deemed common-interest basis, but that procedural did not override the Court-fees Act. Applying Section 6(3) of the Karnataka Court-fees and Suits Valuation Act, read with Section 6(4), the petition had to bear the aggregate fee that would have been payable if separate petitions were filed. The objection to deficit court-fee was therefore correctly upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether a common writ petition filed by multiple petitioners challenging the same taxing provision attracts a single court-fee or separate court-fees from each petitioner.

Analysis: The petitioners carried on separate liquor vending businesses and each was individually affected by the impugned taxing provision. Their interests were therefore separate and distinct, and each had an independent cause of action. Although the writ rules permitted a common petition on a deemed common-interest basis, that procedural facility did not displace the liability created by the Court-fees Act. Section 6(3) of the Karnataka Court-fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1958, applied by Section 6(4) to petitions, required the petition to bear the aggregate court-fee that would have been payable if separate petitions had been filed. The rule was consistent with the principle that multiple petitioners with independent liabilities cannot avoid separate fee liability merely by joining in one petition.

Conclusion: Each petitioner was liable to pay separate court-fee as if he had filed an individual writ petition, and the objection to deficit court-fee was rightly upheld.

---