https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199576 The Supreme Court held that the Acts in question were not considered instruments securing money under Sub-section (iv-A) of Section 7. The Court dismissed the demand for additional court fees under that provision and rejected the argument that the suit should be treated as a declaratory decree. Instead, the court fees payable on the plaint were determined to fall under Clause (b) of Sub-section (iv-B) of Section 7. The appeal was allowed, the High Court's order was set aside, and costs were awarded to the appellant-company. en-us Thu, 04 May 1967 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 Mar 2018 10:27:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199576 The Supreme Court held that the Acts in question were not considered instruments securing money under Sub-section (iv-A) of Section 7. The Court dismissed the demand for additional court fees under that provision and rejected the argument that the suit should be treated as a declaratory decree. Instead, the court fees payable on the plaint were determined to fall under Clause (b) of Sub-section (iv-B) of Section 7. The appeal was allowed, the High Court's order was set aside, and costs were awarded to the appellant-company. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 04 May 1967 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199576