P. K. MISRA, J. ( 1 ) THE availability of the benefit of exemption from payment of Court-fee under the Notification dated 7th June,1994, in a proceeding for issuance of Succession Certificate is the main question for determination in this Civil Revision filed by the applicants whose application has been turned down by the Court below. ( 2 ) PETITIONERS 2 to 6 who are minor children and their mother (petitioner no. 1) have filed Succession Misc. Case No. 45 of 1996 in the Court of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Rourkela. In the said proceeding, they filed an application for exemption from payment of Court-fee on the basis of the Notification issued by the State Government in exercise of powers conferred by Section 35 of the Court-Fees Act, 1870. The court below refused the prayer on the ground that the sum payable under Section 379 of the Indian Succession Act is not "court-fee payable under the Court-Fees Act" and as such the Notification is not applicable. ( 3 ) SECTION 35 of the Court-Fees Act empowers the Government to reduce or remit all or any of the fees mentioned in the First and Second Schedules of the Court-Fees Act by issuing Notification in the Official Gazette. There is no dispute that such a Notification bearing S. R. O. No. 575/94, dated 7th June, 1994, has been issued. Such exemption is available to various categories of persons including women and minors, as indicated in the Notification. There is no doubt that petitioners 2 to 6 being minors and petitioner no. 1 being a woman are squarely covered under the Notification. ( 4 ) THE trial court has, however, refused the prayer relying upon the provisions contained in Section 379 of the Indian Succession Act, which reads as follows :"379. Mode of collecting Court-Fees on certificates. (1) Every application for a certificate or for the extension of a certificate shall be accompanied by a deposit of a sum equal to the fee payable under the Court-Fees Act, 1870, in respect of the certificate or extension applied for. (2) If the application is allowed, the sum deposited by the applicant shall be expended, under the direction of the Judge, in the purchase of the stamp to be used for denoting the fee payable as aforesaid. (2) If the application is allowed, the sum deposited by the applicant shall be expended, under the direction of the Judge, in the purchase of the stamp to be used for denoting the fee payable as aforesaid. (3) Any sum received under sub-section (1) and not expended under sub-section (2) shall be refunded to the person who deposited it. "4-A. The trial Court has opined that as per the provisions contained in sub-section (1) of Section 379 of the Indian Succession Act, an applicant is required to deposit "a sum equal to the "fee" payable under the Court-Fees Act and as per the provisions contained in sub-sections (2) and (3), the sum deposited is to be expended in the purchase of the stamp and, if any sum is not expended, the same is to be refunded. The trial court has emphasised the fact that the sum payable pursuant to Section 379 of the Indian Succession Act is not court-fee payable under the Court-Fees Act. It has further concluded that the very fact that the sum not expended is to be refunded itself is a factor indicating that the sum is to be paid not as a Court-fee, as there is no provision for refund of Court-fee under the Court-Fees Act. This logic of the trial court does not appear to be correct inasmuch as there are various provisions contained in the Court-Fees Act itself, such as Sections 13, 14 and 15 which envisage refund of Court-fee under various circumstances as contemplated in those provisions. Therefore, merely because there is a provision contained in Section 379 of the Indian Succession Act providing for refund of excess amount to the applicant if the same has not been expended, cannot be taken to be a ground for holding that the amount payable under Section 379 of the Indian Succession Act is not a Court-fees. On the other hand, the very heading of Section 379 itself indicates that it provides "mode of collecting Court-fee on Certificates". Section 379 has to be read along with Article 12 of Schedule-I of the Court-Fees Act which provides for Court-fee payable on Succession Certificates under the Indian Succession Act. Section 379 only prescribes a procedural aspect which indicates that the court-fee payable has to be paid at the time of filing the application for issuing Succession Certificate. Section 379 has to be read along with Article 12 of Schedule-I of the Court-Fees Act which provides for Court-fee payable on Succession Certificates under the Indian Succession Act. Section 379 only prescribes a procedural aspect which indicates that the court-fee payable has to be paid at the time of filing the application for issuing Succession Certificate. Unlike in some other cases, such as in final decree proceedings, or in suits for accounts etc. where Court-fee is payable after determination in the suit or proceeding itself, what Section 379 contemplates is that the Court-fee is payable at the threshold and excess amount, if any, is to be refunded at the end. The decision reported in AIR 1935 Allahabad 735 (Khatishammunnisa v. Mir Hadi Ali) relied upon by the trial court also does not categorically lay down that the amount payable under Section 379 does not come within the scope of the Court-Fees Act. ( 5 ) THOUGH a miscellaneous proceeding started for the purpose of grant of Succession Certificate is not a "suit", there is no doubt that it is a civil proceeding to which relevant provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure are attracted by virtue of Section 141 of the Code. In the decision reported in AIR 1938 Madras 436, (Palani Gramani v. Manickammal) it has been held that the provisions contained in Order 33 of the Code of Civil Procedure are applicable to an application for grant of probate or Letters of Administration by virtue of the provisions contained in Section 141 of the Code. Similar views have been expressed in the decisions reported in AIR 1955 Mys 128 (M. C. Chikkananjundappa v. D. K. Pillanna) and (1956) 1 MLJ 163 (S. Unnamalai Ammal v. E. Ramaswami ). In AIR 1964 Patna 272, (Ramji Sao v. Jageshwari) it has been observed that the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure are applicable to proceedings for grant of Succession Certificate by virtue of the provisions contained in S. 141 of the Code. If provisions of Order 33 regarding declaring an applicant as pauper or an indigent person are applicable to proceedings for grant of probate or Letters of Administration which are also governed under the Indian Succession Act, there is no rhyme or reason as to why the provisions of Order 33 would not be applicable to proceedings for grant of Succession Certificate under the Indian Succession Act. As a matter of fact, in the decision reported in AIR 1935 Allahabad 735 (supra), it had been so assumed by the Hon'ble Judges that the provisions in Order 33 are applicable to application for grant of Succession Certificate, but their Lordships made a distinction between fee payable "on the application" for grant of Succession Certificate and the stamp to be affixed on the Succession Certificate itself. On the other hand, in the Division Bench decision reported in AIR 1956 Saurashtra 93, (The State of Saurashtra v. K. S. Shaktikumar Kalikakumar), it was categorically held that all the provisions which relate to the levying of court-fee on a probate apply in the matter of levying court-fee on a succession certificate. A conjoint reading of Section 379 of the Indian Succession Act as well as provisions contained in Article 12 of Schedule I of the Court-Fees Act leaves no room for doubt that the amount payable for issuing Succession Certificate is nothing but 'fee' leviable under the Court-Fees Act. Since provisions of Order 33 are applicable to proceedings for grant of probate, Letters of Administration as well as issuance of Succession Certificate, as held by various decisions, there is no reason as to why the benefit of a Notification issued under Section 35 of the Court-Fees Act exempting a particular class of persons from paying the Court-fee would not be applicable to a proceeding for grant of probate, Letters of Administration or issuance of Succession Certificate. The exemption granted under section 35 of the Court-Fees Act being a beneficial notification issued in exercise of powers under Section 35 of the Court-Fees Act, a liberal interpretation is required to be given to extend the benefit in order to advance the intention of the Legislature. ( 6 ) FOR the aforesaid reasons, I do not agree with the views expressed by the trial court and hold that the petitioners are entitled to avail of the benefits of the Notification issued under Section 35 of the Court-Fees Act. The impugned order is accordingly set aside. The Civil Revision is allowed. There will be no order as to costs. Petition allowed.