Judgment :- T.N. Singaravelu, J. This is an appeal preferred against the order of the learned single Judge, Natarajan, J., in disallowing the costs fixed by the First Assistant Registrar. The appellant herein, who is not now represented by any counsel, preferred an appeal against the order of the First Assistant Registrar fixing the practitioners fee of the counsel for the respondents herein at Rs.1000. It is noticed that a suit was filed by the respondent in C.S.223 of 1976 for filing the arbitration agreement and the application was hotly contested. It was eventually allowed by the learned Judge, Ramaswami, J., who directed the defendant-appellant to pay the plaintiff the costs of the suit. Therefore, the respondents counsel filed a fee certificate for Rs.1,000/-, and that was allowed by the First Assistant Registrar, after overruling the objections raised by the appellant. Thereupon, the respondent herein, namely, the New India Assurance Co., preferred App.In.No.660 of 1977 against the order of the First Assistant Registrar fixing the practitioners fee at Rs.1,000. It was contended on behalf of the Insurance Company that the application was made only under Judges summons and that it was numbered as a suit as per the Rules. No court fee had been paid on the application as on a point and only a nominal court fee was paid on the basis of an application. The learned Judge accepted the contention of the Insurance Company and set aside the order of the Assistant Registrar in awarding counsels fee at Rs.1,000. Hence this appeal by the party. 2. In spite of the fact that the matter appeared in the list for a number of hearings, the appellant was not represented though we adjourned the matter from time to time. Therefore, we heard thelearned counsel for the respondent. We may straightway say that we see no grounds to interfere with the order of the learned single Judge who has given valid reasons for disallowing the costs. As is well known, awarding of costs is always a matter of discretion and when the costs are disallowed reasons for the same are given and the appellate courts do not normally interfere with this discretion. In the instant case, the learned Judge has given unassailable reasons for not allowing the counsels fee at Rs.1,000. As is well known, awarding of costs is always a matter of discretion and when the costs are disallowed reasons for the same are given and the appellate courts do not normally interfere with this discretion. In the instant case, the learned Judge has given unassailable reasons for not allowing the counsels fee at Rs.1,000. As already stated, it was only an application and not a suit and therefore, it cannot be treated as equivalent to a plaint. Only in order to comply with the technical rule it is numbered as a suit. What is more, there was no adjudication of the rights of the parties as regards the main controversy between them. The only point that arose in that application was regarding the right of the respondents to have the arbitration agreement filed and have the dispute referred to an arbitrator. The learned Judge has taken all these things into consideration and found that a counsels fee of Rs.1,000 is totally disproportionate to the nature of the dispute involved and therefore set aside the order of the First Assistant Registrar. We do not see any reason to interfere with this judicial discretion. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.