Jwala Prasad, J.

1. This is a court-fees matter and has been referred to me as a Taxing Judge. The first question for determination is whether the memorandum of appeal is sufficiently stamped.

2. The memorandum of appeal was filed before the Assistant Registrar of the High Court on the 18th of August 1922 when the old Court-Fees Act was in force. According to that Act, the memorandum of appeal b ore court-fee of sufficient value. The new Bihar and Orissa Court-fees Act (Act II of 1922) came into force on the 24th day of August 1922, according to which the court-fees should have been much larger than has been paid by the appellant. The Court was closed for the long vacation from the 4th of August to the 22nd, of October, 1922, though the offices were open and the Registrar was on duty. Under Order XL, rule 1, the memorandum of appeal must be "presented to the Court or to such officer as it appoints in this behalf". This Court has appointed the Registrar to receive memorandum of appeal (Chapter II, rule 13, clause 3 Patna High Court Rules.). There are ample authorities to show that a memorandum of appeal presented during the vacation to the proper officer appointed in that behalf will be valid presentation although it is open to an appellant to present a memorandum of appeal on the first day of the opening of the Court under the Law of Limitation if the time fixed for the filing of the same expires during a vacation. This is for the benefit of litigants. But there is nothing to prevent the presentation of a plaint or a memorandum of appeal during a vacation or even on a Sunday provided it is presented to a proper officer and that officer receives it vide Ununto Ram v. Protab Chunder 16 W.R. 230 Gobind Kumar v. Nargopal 3 Beng L.R. 72 and Ram Das Chakarbati v. The Official Liquidator of the Cotton Ginning Company Limited (1887) 9 All. 366. Therefore if the Assistant Registrar in this case was the officer properly constituted to receive the-memorandum of appeal, in my opinion the appeal was then properly presented and filed on the 18th of August 1922 and the court-fee payable was that prescribed by the Act which was then in force, namely, the old Court-fees Act.

3. The chief question, therefore, for determination is whether the Assistant Registrar was the officer authorized to receive the memorandum of appeal in question. He has not been expressly so appointed by the rules of our Court. The Registrar, though on duty, was not in Patna those days. It has been urged that he had delegated his powers to the Assistant Registrar under rule 14 of Chapter II of our Rules.

4. There is nothing to show that the powers were delegated by the Registrar under that rule, even if the Registrar had the power to do so and that the receiving of the memorandum of appeal was not a judicial or quasi judicial matter.

5. It is then said that the Assistant Registrar must be deemed by implication to have the powers of the Registrar delegated to him. This contention is based upon what is said to have been the practice prior to 1919 when the Deputy and the Assistant Registrar used to receive appeals during vacation. We do not know whether they did it under any delegation of powers made by the Registrar, or only as a mere matter of practice. I do not think that the- delegation, if any, prior to 1919 will be of any avail for the year 1922. In order to apply rule 14, it must be clearly shown that there was a declaration by the Registrar of his powers to the Deputy or the Assistant Registrar before he left for Ranchi during the last vacation. There fore rule 14 does not help the appellants in the present case.

6. Under rule 16, in the absence of the Registrar, his powers under rule 13 clause (1) to (13), must be exercised by a Judge or Judges; in other words, the power of the Registrar to receive, an appeal under clause 3) of rule 13 could, only during the vacation and in the absence of the Registrar, be exercised by a Judge of this Court. The memorandum of appeal should therefore have been, in the absence of the Registrar, presented to Mr. Justice Adami who was the Vacation Judge. Whether the receiving of a memorandum of appeal is a judicial act or not, rule 16 expressly says that it shall be only within the competence of a Judge or Judges of this Court, in the absence of the Registrar, to receive a memorandum of appeal, and in the face of this express provision I do not think that the Deputy or the Assistant Registrar could receive the memorandum of appeal in question. They could only perform such of the duties of the Registrar as were enjoined upon them under clauses (14) to (23) of the said rule. Therefore although, in my opinion, the appeal could be presented on the 18th of August 1922 to the Registrar or a Judge of this Court, it was not properly presented to the Court or to the officer appointed by the Court under Order 41, rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Therefore the memorandum of appeal should be deemed to have been presented on the 23rd of October 1922 when the Court reopened and the Registrar actually received the document and noted on the order sheet as having been filed on that date. The new Bihar and Orissa Court-Fees Act, which had already come into force before the 23rd of October 1922 will apply to the present case, and hence the memorandum of appeal is insufficiently stamped to the extent and the value indicated by the Stamp Reporter.

7. The Vakalatnama is also insufficiently stamped, as is reported by the said officer.

8. The copies of the judgments and the decrees, to my mind, are properly stamped and bear sufficient court-fees, inasmuch as they were obtained before the present Act came into force and therefore the fact that they were filed after the present Court-Fees Act came into force would not make those documents invalid and unreceivable under the new Court-Fees Act. This is also supported by the General Clauses Act, Section 6, clause (c). The present Act cannot have the retrospective effect to impose a liability upon the appellants to pay court-fee which they were not liable to pay on the date when the copies were obtained by them.

9. I understand that there are number of cases of this nature. They will all be governed by this Judgment.