TMI Blog1999 (7) TMI 697X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r to defeat the rights of the plaintiffs and being the effect of mis-representation, coercion and without legal necessity. 2. Valuation of the suit for the purposes of court fee and jurisdiction was assessed at ₹ 200/- by the petitioners-plaintiffs and accordingly court fee valuing at ₹ 25/- was affixed on the plaint. An application was filed by the defendants under Order 7 rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure contesting the court-fee affixed. As per the respondents-defendants the plaintiffs-petitioners have challenged the validity of the sale-deed dated 24th July, 1997 by which defendant No. 2 had transferred the suit land in favour of defendant No. 1 for a consideration of ₹ 1,62,000/- and accordingly was liable to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ther executed a mortgagee deed by claiming himself to be sole owner of the mortgaged property. On the basis of the aforesaid deed he filed a suit and obtained a decree. The mortgaged then tried to take out execution proceedings for the sale of the mortgaged property. The sons then filed a suit for a declaration that the mortgage was null and void and ineffective as against them as the property was a joint Hindu Family property. On the plaint filed by the sons they paid/filed court fee of ₹ 19.50 which was objected to. The trial Court directed the plaintiffs to pay ad-valorem court fee. The plaintiffs thereupon brought the matter of this Court. This Court set aside the order of the trial Court and agreed that the plaintiffs by taking t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ove, I cannot accept the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners-plaintiffs to the effect that the present case is governed for the purpose of court fee by section 7(iv)(b) and (c) of the Court Fees Act, 1870. 7. It also deserves to be noticed that the learned counsel for the petitioners-plaintiffs relied upon the decision of the Apex Court in S. Rm. Ar. S. Sp. Sathappa Chettiar v. S. Rm. Ar. Rm. Ramanathan Chettiar, AIR 1958 SC 245, and strenuously asserted that the question of court fee must be seen in the light of the allegations made in the plaint and its decision cannot be influenced either by the pleadings in the written statement or by the final decision of the suit on merits. According to the learned counsel, so far ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
