Krishna Mallar vs Secretary of State for India in Council

u/s 8 of the Suits Valuation Act in this class of suits the valuation as determinable for the computation of the Court-fee and the valuation for the

purposes of jurisdiction shall be the same. The plaint valued the suit at Rs. 15,100, but the prayer stated that the declaration was valued at Rs.

15,000 for purposes of jurisdiction and that the consequential relief--the cancellation and return of the bond-was valued at Rs. 100. u/s 7 (iv) of

the Court Fees Act the consequential relief should alone have been valued and the value u/s 8 of the Suits Valuation Act would determine the

jurisdiction. As it appeared on the face of the plaint that the valuation of the consequential relief was only Rs. 100, whereas there was another

valuation of Rs. 15,100 given, the plaint should have been returned for amendment so that the plaintiff might elect one single valuation for both

purposes as required by law. It appears that the plaintiff presented his plaint with a stamp for Rs. 17-8-0 and that the Court returned it to the

plaintiff. A few days later the plaintiff paid up the deficiency in the Court-fee on Rs. 15,100.

We think in these circumstances he must be taken to have elected to value his suit for all purposes at Rs. 15,100, a valuation which he was

entitled to make, Chinnammal v. Madarsa Rowther 27 Ma. 480 : 14 M.L.J. 343, and we decline to interfere in revision with the order of the

District Judge.

The petition is dismissed.