TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1981 (11) TMI 192
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Court raised an objection to the effect that proper, court-fees payable on that. petition in which thirteen petitioners had joined, was Rs. 1,300 and the petitioners had to make good the deficient court-fee of Rs. 1200. The learned single Judge, who heard that office objection, upheld it. 4. The question as to the court-fee payable on a writ petition filed by more than one petitioner, impugning a taxing provision imposing tax upon them, arises for our decision in this appeal. 5. The court-fee payable on a petition under Article 226, is prescribed by Clause (S) of Article 1 of Sch. II to the Karnataka Court-fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') which reads :"Petition to the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution for a writ other than the writ of habeas corpus................. one hundred rupees". 6. Material portions of R. 7 of the Writ Proceedings Rules, 1977 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'), which deals with the procedure for filing common or joint writ petition in this Court, as that Rule stood when the instant writ petition was presented, reads thus:- "7. Procedure for filing common or joint petitions :- ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t of that sub-rule. 8. The learned Addl. Government Advocate, on the other hand, contended that each of the petitioners is separately aggrieved by the levy of the impugned taxing provision as each' of them is carrying on business separately and not jointly with the others and has a separate and distinct interest though similar or identical. fie also contended that the present writ petition is governed by sub rule (1) and not by sub-rule (2) of Rule 7 of the Rules that hence the explanation to sub-rule (2) was not attracted. He maintained that the court-fee payable on a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, is since prescribed under Clause (s) I of Article I of Schedule 11 to the Act, the filing of a joint or a common writ petition by more than one person as permitted under theò Rules made by the High Court, by itself, is not sufficient to relieve them of their liability to pay aggregate amount of court-fee under sub-section (3) read with sub-section (4) of Section 6 of the Act as, if they had filed individual and separate writ petitions. 9. Whether the petitioners in the present writ petition, should be regarded as those who have a common or joint intere....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r the appeal, joined hi one action, although only one petition or appeal may be filed, court-fee has got to be paid separately on the petition or the appeal by each one of the petitioners-appellants, having an individual interest. 15. Coming to the case of petitioners in the present writ petition, all of them are not carrying on business of vending liquor jointly but each of them is carrying on his own business of vending liquor separately. Can it be said that such petitioners have a common interest? Common interest is not the same as similar interest. Where several persons claim an interest in the subject matter of controversy, as members of a class or community or residents of a locality, they can be said to have a common interest in respect of such subject-matter. An example of such common interest is the interest of the villagers to graze their cattle in the village pasture of Gomal land. Another example of such common interest is the interest of members of a religious denomination to immerse a deity in a particular tank. 16. Petitioners in the present writ petition do not claim to have any common interest in the subject-matter of controversy as members of a class or communit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....39;s are sought based on them, either alternatively or cumulatively, the plaint shall be chargeable with which plaints would be chargeable under the Act if separate suits were instituted in respect of the several causes of action. (The provison is omitted as it is not relevant for the present purpose). (4) The provision of this section shall apply mutates mutandis to memoranda of appeals, applications, petitions and written. statements." (The explanation is omitted as it is not relevant for the present purpose). 18. As already pointed by us, each of the petitioners has a separate and distinct interest in the subject-matter of controversy in the writ petition, that is, the taxing provision impugned therein, because of the individual injury which each of them stands to suffer under the impugned taxing provision. From this, it follows that each of the petitioners has a separate and distinct cause of action in respect of the impugned taxing provision. Therefore, if a writ petition embraces two or more separate and distinct interest (causes of action) of several petitioners, who seek separate relief's based on those interests (causes of action), it (the writ petition) becomes li....