Gujarat Court
Fees Act, 2004
Twelve chapter notes covering the modernised court-fees framework of Gujarat — the displacement of the older Bombay Court Fees Act 1959 (as it applied to Gujarat), the ad valorem and fixed-fee schemes, the suits-valuation rules under Section 6, the special provisions for declaratory and injunctive suits, the refund framework, and the appellate court fee structure. Section first, fee category second, leading case third.
Gujarat’s 2004 modernisation of court fees.
The Gujarat Court Fees Act 2004 came into force in 2004, replacing the Bombay Court Fees Act 1959 as it applied to Gujarat. The 2004 Act is a modernised consolidation of court-fees provisions, with rationalised rates, simpler valuation rules, and improved refund mechanisms. Its structure follows the dual approach common to State court fee statutes — ad valorem fees for suits where the relief is monetarily valuable, fixed fees for declaratory and other suits where the relief is not capable of monetary valuation. Section 6 provides the rules for valuing different kinds of suits.
These notes anchor every chapter to its statutory section. The most-tested provisions are Section 4 (court fees on documents), Section 6 (computation of fees and valuation of suits), Section 28 (procedure on plaint with insufficient stamp), Section 50 (refund of court fees), and the Schedule rates.
Each chapter is designed to be read in twelve to fifteen minutes and to leave the reader with the statutory section, the fee category (ad valorem or fixed), the valuation rule for the suit, the consequence of insufficient stamp, and the leading authority.
How to read these notes
Start with the section.
Every chapter opens with the precise Section of the Gujarat Court Fees Act 2004. Read it. The most-tested provisions — Section 4, Section 6 (valuation rules), Section 28 (insufficient stamp), Section 50 (refund) — must be cited section-and-clause.
Identify the fee category.
Every Gujarat court fees question first identifies the fee category. Ad valorem suits are valued under Section 6 with court fee proportional to the value. Fixed-fee suits are listed in the Schedule with predetermined fees. Declaratory suits with consequential relief require additional valuation. Wrong category leads to insufficient stamp objection.
Test on the leading case.
If you can restate the holding of S. Rm. Ar. S. Sp. Sathappa Chettiar v. S. Rm. Ar. S. Sp. Sathappa Chettiar, State of Gujarat v. Lakhabhai, or Tara Devi v. Sri Thakur Radha Krishna Maharaj in two sentences, you understand the chapter. If not, return to the statutory section and rebuild from there.
All 12 chapters, in 3 groups
Sequenced through the natural structure of the subject — every chapter sits in a doctrinal cluster.Foundations — Definitions & Fee Framework
Sections 1–5 — the basic provisions
The Act’s scope and applicability across Gujarat’s civil and revenue courts, the displacement of the Bombay Court Fees Act 1959. The definitions including plaint, document, market value. The Section 4 court fees on documents and the principle that no document of any kind shall be filed unless duly stamped. The Section 5 power to grant exemptions on grounds of poverty.
Valuation Rules — Section 6
Section 6 + Schedule — the computation
The Section 6 rules for computing court fees and valuing suits. Subsection (i) suits for money. Subsection (iv) suits for declaration with consequential relief. Subsection (v) suits for possession of immovable property. Subsection (vi) suits for partition. Subsection (xi) suits for injunction. The Schedule fixed-fee categories. The interface between Section 6 valuation and the pecuniary jurisdiction of the court.
Insufficient Stamp, Refund & Wrap-Up
Sections 28–83 + reference
The Section 28 procedure on plaint with insufficient stamp — return of plaint with opportunity to make up the deficit. The Section 50 refund of court fees in specified circumstances including settlement, withdrawal, dismissal in default. The interface with the Limitation Act and the landmark Gujarat High Court and Supreme Court decisions on court fees.