Power to make up deficiency of court-fees
Section 149 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 deals with power to make up deficiency of court-fees. Where the whole or any part of any fee prescribed for any document by the law for the time being in force relating to court-fees has not been paid, the Court may, in its discretion, at any stage, allow the person, by whom such fee is payable, to pay the whole or part, as the case may be, of such cou The Act came into force on 01 Jan 1909.
Where the whole or any part of any fee prescribed for any document by the law for the time being in force relating to court-fees has not been paid, the Court may, in its discretion, at any stage, allow the person, by whom such fee is payable, to pay the whole or part, as the case may be, of such court-fee; and upon such payment the document, in respect of which fee is payable, shall have the same force and effect as if such fee had been paid in the first instance.
Section 149, The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Act 5 of 1908).
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
P.K. Palanisamy v. N. Arumugham
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Judgment of Main Case order-5.pdf 2009-07-23 DATE VERIFIED (same PDF also carries the pronouncement ROP wrapper; signed reportable follows). Sinha/Deepak Verma. C.A. from SLP (C) 2308/2009. CPC 149 lets the court, in its discretion at any stage, allow deficit court-fee to be made up, and on payment the document is deemed paid in the first instance; court-fee is a matter between the State and the suitor. Once 149 time is allowed, Order VII Rule 11(c) cannot reject the plaint, especially after written statement, issues and evidence. Wrong mention of s.148 instead of 149 does not vitiate. Map cpc 149 only. Do not pad cpc 148 (already filled by Thankappan) or O.7 R.11.
On this section: CPC 149 permits deficit court-fee to be made up at any stage with retrospective effect; once that discretion is exercised, Order VII Rule 11(c) cannot reject the plaint (P.K. Palanisamy).
-
Kalamuddin M Ansari vs Govt. of India
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The maintainability of a Letters Patent Appeal against an order passed by a learned Single Judge depends on the true nature of the jurisdiction exercised (whether Article 226, Article 227, or both) and the true character of the order passed, which is to be determined by examining the pleadings, the directions issued, and the constitutional jurisdictional framework - not by the nomenclature of the proceeding or a judge's statement about which article was used. Judicial orders of civil courts are exclusively amenable to Article 227 (superintendence) and not Article 226 (certiorari), and no Letters Patent appeal lies against orders passed purely under Article 227. Orders of tribunals and authorities (except civil courts) may be amenable to Article 226 writ petitions if conditions for certiorari are satisfied, and if a petition is filed under both Articles 226 and 227 with Article 226 as the principal basis, Letters Patent appeal is maintainable despite Clause 15 bar. Whether a tribunal/authority must be a party depends on whether it is legally entitled to defend the order, with civil courts standing on a different footing from adjudicating authorities and tribunals.
On this section: Referenced for limiting grounds of appeal in specific statutory contexts
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Judgments citing this section
These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.
-
… application shall be rejected unless the appellant or applicant supplies the requisite stamp within a reasonable time after the discovery of the mistake to be fixed by the court." 7. The above provision was later enacted, albeit in a differently worded form in the Code of Civil Procedure of 1908, which is present Section 149. In Mannan Lal v. Mst. Chhotaka Bibi & Ors.<sup>2</sup> this Court while dealing with Section 149 of CPC and Section 4 of the Court Fees Act, referred to the history of amendment, as we have stated above, and had this to say in its para 12 and 13 of the judgment:- "12. The above section therefore …
-
… application shall be rejected unless the appellant or applicant supplies the requisite stamp within a reasonable time after the discovery of the mistake to be fixed by the court." 7. The above provision was later enacted, albeit in a differently worded form in the Code of Civil Procedure of 1908, which is present Section 149. In Mannan Lal v. Mst. Chhotaka Bibi & Ors.<sup>2</sup> this Court while dealing with Section 149 of CPC and Section 4 of the Court Fees Act, referred to the history of amendment, as we have stated above, and had this to say in its para 12 and 13 of the judgment:- "12. The above section therefore …
-
… No.15 of 2025 has been filed by the plaintiff seeking amendment of the pleadings invoking provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Order VI Rule 17. I.A. No.16 of 2025 has also been filed on 17.04.2025 by the plaintiff under Chapter VI Rule 27(a) of the Orissa High Court Rules, 1948 read with Section 149 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 read with Section 151 of the CPC, 1908, inter alia, seeking a direction for deferment of payment of court fees. 3. By order dated 30.04.2025 the following order was passed by this Bench : "The matter has been listed before this Bench being assignment of the roster …
Questions about Section 149
What have the courts held on Section 149 of the Code of Civil Procedure?
P.K. Palanisamy v. N. Arumugham (23 Jul 2009) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: CPC 149 permits deficit court-fee to be made up at any stage with retrospective effect; once that discretion is exercised, Order VII Rule 11(c) cannot reject the plaint (P.K. Palanisamy). Another 1 judgment on this section is set out below, all of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2009 to 2015.
How do I find court cases under Section 149 of the Code of Civil Procedure?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: CPC 149, section 149 CPC, section 149 of the Code of Civil Procedure. People searching for it also type cpc 149 bis and 149 cpc application. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 2 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with P.K. Palanisamy v. N. Arumugham (23 Jul 2009).
When did Section 149 of the Code of Civil Procedure come into force?
Section 149 of the Code of Civil Procedure, cited as CPC 149, came into force on 01 Jan 1909, having been enacted on 21 Mar 1908. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 115. Revision2475 words
- 60. Property liable to attachment and sale in execution of decree1869 words
- 2. Definitions890 words
- 9. Courts to try all civil suits unless barred714 words
- 42. Powers of Court in executing transferred decree653 words
- 92. Public charities610 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 14 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.