J. M. SHETH, J. ( 1 ) IN this revision petition an interesting question regarding Court-fees arises. The petitioner (wife) in Hindu Marriage Petition No. 59 of 1971 filed an application for alimony pendente lite under sec. 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955 (which will be hereinafter referred to as the Act) against opponent No. 1 her husband. Inspecting Officer Court-fees under sec. 12 of the Bombay Court-fees Act 1959 made a report that Court-fees of Re. 0. 90 paise paid for the said application were inadequate. A preliminary finding was recorded on receipt of this report by the learned Joint Civil Judge Senior Division Baroda and a show cause notice was issued as to why the deficit Court-fees should not be recovered. According to the Inspectors report Court-fees payable were Rs. 37. 50 paise. Article 21 of Schedule II of the Bombay Court-fees Act 1959 according to him would govern the payment of Court-fees. ( 2 ) THE learned trial Judge after hearing the parties accepted the report of the Inspector and directed the petitioner to affix additional Court-fees of Rs. 36. 60 paise on Ex. 10 application for interim alimony. ( 3 ) BEING dissatisfied with that order the petitioner has preferred the present revision petition to this Court. ( 4 ) SCHEDULE II Article 21 reads:- Plait application petition or memorandum of appeal under the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act 1936 the Special Marriage Act 1954 or the Hindu Marriage Act 1955provided that wherein addition to divorce damages are claimedcourt-FEES payable are Rs. 37. 50 paise and in case in addition to divorce damages are claimed a fee as above plus a fee on the amount of damages claimed according to the scale prescribed under Article 1 of Schedule I is payable. ARTICLE 20 of that Schedule II reads:-EVERY petition under the Indian Divorce Act 1869 except petitions under sec. 44 of that Act and every memorandum of appeal under sec. 55 of that Act Court-fees payable are Rs. 37 50 paise. ( 5 ) IF we refer to sec. ARTICLE 20 of that Schedule II reads:-EVERY petition under the Indian Divorce Act 1869 except petitions under sec. 44 of that Act and every memorandum of appeal under sec. 55 of that Act Court-fees payable are Rs. 37 50 paise. ( 5 ) IF we refer to sec. 44 of the Indian Divorce Act 1869 it reads:-THE High Court after a decree absolute for dissolution of marriage or a decree of nullity of marriageand the District Court after a decree for dissolution of marriage or nullity of marriage has been confirmedmay upon application by petition for the purpose make from time to time all such orders and provision with respect to the custody maintenance and education of the minor children the marriage of whose parents was the subject of the decree or for placing such children under the protection of the said court as might have been made by such decree absolute or decree (as the case may be) or by such interim orders as aforesaid. IT thus clearly appears that the Legislature never intended to levy this amount of Court-fees of Rs. 37. 50 paise on such interim applications or petitions made for such interim reliefs. In sec. 44 of the Indian Divorce Act 1869 the word petition is used. So the Legislature has specifically provided and exempted the category of petitions contemplated under sec. 44 as there was room for contention that on such a petition also Court-fees of Rs 37. 50 paise should be paid. ( 6 ) ARTICLE 23 of Schedule II of the Bombay Court-fees Act 1959 reads:-PLAINT petition or application (including memorandum of appeal) which is capable of being treated as a suit (A) for annulment of marriage; Thirty-seven rupees fifty naye paise. (b) for dissolution of marriage; thirty-seven rupees fifty naye paise. (c) in suit for custody of minor; eighteen rupees seventy-five naye paise. (d) for restitution of conjugal rights; Thirty-seven rupees fifty naye paise. (e) for judicial separation Thirty-seven rupees fifty naye paise. (f) in or to any Civil Court not Thirty rupees otherwise provided for and the sub- ject matter of which is not capable of being estimated in money valuethis Article 23 also is indicative of the legislative mind. It indicates that such Court-fees are payable when plaint petition or application including memorandum of appeal is capable of being treated as a suit. ( 7 ) MR. It indicates that such Court-fees are payable when plaint petition or application including memorandum of appeal is capable of being treated as a suit. ( 7 ) MR. Nanavati learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the State urged that in Article 23 of Schedule II of the Bombay Court-fees Act there was a specific mention made that on plaint petition or application including of memorandum of appeal Court-fees of Rs. 37. 50 paise would be payable if such a plaint petition or application is capable of being treated as a suit. In Article 21 of Schedule 2 there is no such mention. In my opinion that would not make any difference as in Article 21 of Schedule II the Acts have been mentioned and those Acts contemplate for the final reliefs filing of plaint application or petition. Those Acts also mention that provisions of Civil Procedure Code will apply. It was therefore not necessary to specifically mention therein that such Court-fees are payable if such plaint application petition it capable of being treated as a suit. ( 8 ) PROVISO to Article 21 in my opinion is clearly indicative of the position that only plaint application petition or memorandum of appeal referred to therein where such final reliefs have been claimed were contemplated to be covered by it and not applications like applications where interim reliefs are claimed as for example application for alimony pendente lite under sec. 24 of the Act. Proviso indicates that where in addition to divorce damages are claimed separate Court-fees are to be paid in regard to that claim on the basis of the amount of damages claimed according to the scale prescribed in Article I of Schedule I. ( 9 ) ARTICLE 1 of Schedule II provides for the payment of Court-fees on application or petition referred to therein in different clauses. Clause (c) which is material for our purposes reads:-APPLICATION or petition when containing a complaint or charge of any offence and presented to any Criminal Court; or when presented to a Civil Criminal or Revenue Court or to a Collector or any Revenue Officer or to a Public Officer having jurisdiction equal or subordinate to a Collector or to any Magistrate in his executive capacity and not otherwise provided for by this Act sixty five naye paise. IN the instant case application has been presented to a Civil Court. IN the instant case application has been presented to a Civil Court. If it could be said that such an application is not otherwise provided for by this Act the Court-fees would be payable according to that clause (c ). ( 10 ) I will now refer to the relevant provisions of the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act 1936 Secs. 30 to 38 are relevant for our purposes. Sec. 30 of it refers to suits for nullity of marriage. Sec. 31 relates to suits for dissolution. Sec. 32 mentions the grounds for divorce. Sec. 34 relates to suits for judicial separation. Sec. 35 relates to suits for restitution of conjugal rights. Sec. 45 in terms states:-45 The provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 shall so far as the same may be applicable apply to proceedings in suits instituted under this Act including) proceedings in execution and orders subsequent to decree. IT thus appears from the scheme of this Act that such proceedings are referred to as suits and suits can be instituted by presenting a plaint. So in cases of proceedings under the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act 1936 proceedings will be in the nature of suits and such suits can be instituted by presenting a plaint. ( 11 ) I will now refer to the provisions of Special Marriage Act 1954 Sec. 22 of it which is material for our purposes reads:-WHEN either the husband or the wife has without reasonable excuse withdrawn from the society of the other the aggrieved party may apply by petition to the District Court for restitution of conjugal rights and the court on being satisfied of the truth of the statements made in such petition and that there is no legal ground why the application should not be granted may decree restitution of conjugal rights accordingly. THIS section shows that word used for taking of such a proceeding is petition. It is also referred to as application. It is evident that application or petition contemplated is an application or petition for getting the final relief regarding the restitution of conjugal rights. Similarly in sec. 23 which deals with Judicial Separation the word petition is used. Sec. 27 which deals with divorce also contemplates presenting of petition for divorce. Sec. 28 deals with Divorce by mutual consent. It also contemplates presenting a petition for divorce. Similarly in sec. 23 which deals with Judicial Separation the word petition is used. Sec. 27 which deals with divorce also contemplates presenting of petition for divorce. Sec. 28 deals with Divorce by mutual consent. It also contemplates presenting a petition for divorce. Sec. 29 which deals with Restriction on petitions for divorce during first three years after marriage also contemplates petition. A distinction is made regarding application in sub-sec. (2) by stating:- (2) In disposing of any application under this section for leave to present a petition for divorce before the expiration of three years from the date of the marriage the District Court shall have regard to the interests of any children of the marriage and to the question whether there is a reasonable probability of a reconciliation between the parties before the expiration of the said three years. ( 12 ) SEC. 31 of the Special Marriage Act 1954 deals with a questing regarding the forum where such petitions have to be filed. Sec. 32 enjoins that such petitions under Chapter V or Chapter VI require verification Sec. 33 also contemplates petition for divorce. Sec. 36 deals with Alimony pendente lite. It reads:-WHERE in any proceeding under Chapter V or Chapter VI it appears to the District Court that the wife has no independent income sufficient for her support and the necessary expenses of the proceeding it may on the application of the wife order the husband to pay to her the expenses of the proceeding and weekly or monthly during the proceeding such sum as having regard to the husbands income it may seem to the court to be reasonable. THIS sec. 36 thus indicates that where an interim order was intended to be passed by the court the word application is used and not the word petition. ( 13 ) SEC. 37 deals with permanent alimony and maintenance. It reads:- (1) Any court exercising jurisdiction under Chapter V or Chapter VI may at the time of passing any decree or at any time subsequent to the decree on application made to it for the purpose order that the husband shall secure to the wife for her maintenance and support if necessary by a charge on the husbands propertysec. 38 deals with Custody of Children. 38 deals with Custody of Children. It reads:- in any proceeding under Chapter V or Chapter VI the District Court may from time to time pass such interim orders and make such provisions in the decree as it may seem to it to be just and proper with respect to the custody maintenance and education of minor children with their wishes wherever possible and may after the decree upon application by petition for the purposes make revoke. . . . . . IT thus indicates that if something is to be done as contemplated therein after the decree an application is to be made by a petition ( 14 ) THE scheme of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955 in this behalf also appears to be almost identical. Sec. 9 of the Act deals with restitution of conjugal rights. For getting such reliefs one has to apply to the court by a petition. Same is the position if a relief for judicial separation is to be claimed or a relief for declaration that the marriage is void is sought for. Similar is the position when the relief regarding divorce is sought for. ( 15 ) SEC. 14 of the Act reads:- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act it shall not be competent for any court to entertain any petition for dissolution of a marriage by a decree of divorce unless at the date of the Presentation of the petition three years have elapsed she the date of the marriage. PROVISO to it reads:- provided that the Court may upon application made to it in accordance with such rules as may be made by the High Court in that behalf allow a petition to be presented before there years have elapsed. . . . . SUB-SEC. (2) of sec. 14 of the Act reads:- in disposing of any application under this section for leave to present a petition for divorce before the expiration of three years from the date of the marriage the court shall have regard to the interests of any children of the marriage and to the question whether there is a reasonable probability of a reconciliation between the parties before the expiration of the said three years. IT is thus evident that in this very sec 14 of the Act distinction has been kept in mind between the petition and application. IT is thus evident that in this very sec 14 of the Act distinction has been kept in mind between the petition and application. Where final relief is to be given word petition is used. Where some interim reliefs are claimed word used is application. ( 16 ) SEC 19 of the Act deals with the forum where such petition is to be presented. Sec. 20 requires that such petitions have to be verified. Sec. 21 reads:-SUBJECT to the other provisions contained in this Act and to such rules as the High Court may make in this behalf all proceedings under this Act shall be regulated as far as may be by the Code of Civil Procedure 1908sec. 22 of the Act reads:- (1) A proceeding under this Act shall be conducted in camera if either party so desires or if the court so thinks fit to do and it shall not be lawful for any person to print or publish any matter in relation to any such proceeding except with the previous permission of the Court. (2) If any person prints or publishes any matter in contravention of the provisions contained in sub-sec. (1) he shall be punishable with fine which may extend so one thousand rupeesin sec. 23 the word used is petition. In sec. 24 which is material for our purposes the word used is application. It reads:-WHERE in any proceeding under this Act it appears to the court that either the wife or the husband as the case may be has no independent income sufficient for her or his support and the necessary expenses of the proceeding it may on the application of the wife or the husband order the respondent to pay to the petitioner the expenses of the proceeding and monthly during the proceeding such sum as having regard to the petitioners own income and the income of the respondent it may seem to the court to be reasonable. IT is thus evident that when interim reliefs are to be claimed word used is application. In sec. 25 of the Act which deals with permanent alimony and maintenance. the word used is application. IT is thus evident that when interim reliefs are to be claimed word used is application. In sec. 25 of the Act which deals with permanent alimony and maintenance. the word used is application. Sec. 26 of the Act which is material for our purposes reads:-IN any proceeding under this Act the court may from time to time pass such interim orders and make such provisions in the decree as it may deem just and proper with respect to the custody maintenance and education of minor children consistently with their wishes wherever possible and may after the decree upon application by petition for the purpose make from time to time all such orders and provisions with respect to the custody maintenance and education of such children as might have been made by such decree or interim orders in case the proceeding for obtaining such decree were still pending and the court may also from time to time revoke suspend or vary any such orders and provisions previously madein this section when such prayer is to be made after the decree one has to make an application be petition for that purpose. A distinction has therefore been kept in mind where application is to be made by a petition for certain reliefs. ( 17 ) TAKING into consideration the entire scheme of the Court-fees Act it appears that what the Legislature contemplated was to levy Court fees of Rs. 37. 50 paise on plaint application petition or memorandum of appeal under the Acts referred to in Article 21 of Schedule II of the Bombay Court-fees Act 1959 of the nature wherein final reliefs or substantial reliefs as contemplated under those Acts were asked for and they did not include such application for interim relief viz. alimony pendente lite or an application as contemplated under proviso to sec. 14 of the Act to allow a petition to be presented before three years have elapsed since the date of the marriage on the grounds specified therein. The word application which follows the word plaint and which is followed by the words petition or memorandum of appeal in Article 21 of Schedule II of the Bombay Court-fees Act must take colour from the words in the company of which that word is found. The word application which follows the word plaint and which is followed by the words petition or memorandum of appeal in Article 21 of Schedule II of the Bombay Court-fees Act must take colour from the words in the company of which that word is found. As said earlier the wording of the proviso which deals with payment of additional Court-fees where damages are claimed in addition to divorce is a clear indication that the Legislature never intended to levy Court-fees of Rs. 37. 50 paise on such interim applications which are filed during the pendency of the proceeding for obtaining interim reliefs. ( 18 ) LEARNED Author B. K. Amin in his book The Bombay Court Fees Act 1959 has commented in this behalf as under:-THIS is a comprehensive article and makes a provision for matrimonial petitions under the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act Special Marriage Act and also Hindu Marriage Act and it provides some Court fees in each of the three cases and also some Court-fees where the proceeding is by way of plaint petition or appeal. A fixed Court-fee of Rs. 37. 50 paise is payable on all matrimonial petitions. The proviso provides that if damages are claimed then ad valorem fees on the amount of damages claimed must in addition he paid. This article however does not deal with interlocutory applications for custody of children interim maintenance pendente lite which would fall under Article 1 clause (c) of Schedule II if the proceedings in the subordinate courts but would fall under sub-article (iii) of clause (f) of Article 1 of Schedule II if the proceedings are in the High Court. ( 19 ) LOOKING to the scheme of the Act this statement made by the learned author appears to me to be a correct statement. ( 20 ) THE learned trial Judge has in my opinion committed an error in coming to the conclusion that any such application filed during the pendency of the proceedings for interim reliefs would be liable to pay the Court-fees as contemplated under Article 21 of Schedule II of the Bombay Court-fees Act 1959 The order dated 20-7-1971 passed by the trial Court is therefore set aside and the revision petition is allowed. Rule is made absolute. No order as to costs is made in this revision petition. .