Nanak Chand and Another vs Nand Kumar

J.V. Gupta, J.—This revision petition is directed against the order of the trial court dated October 13, 1988, whereby the plaintiffs were directed to pay court fee on the market value of the property, in dispute, which was assessed at Rs. 1,80,000/-.

The plaintiffs filed the suit for the declaration; for possession; for mesne profits and also for the grant of the mandatory injunction etc. as given in the heading of the plaint. One of the issues framed was; whether the suit is not properly valued for the purpose of court-fee and jurisdiction. The trial court relying upon the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Surjit Kumar v. Jai Paul 1975 PLR 308, came to the conclusion that the case was covered by Section 7(v)(b) of the Court fees Act and not by Section 7(v)(d) of the said Act. Consequently, the market price of the suit land was determined to be Rs. 1,80,000/- and the plaintiffs were directed to pay the advalorem court fee.

At the time of the motion hearing, it was contended that the claim of the plaintiffs petitioners in the suit was for the cancellation of the sale deed Consideration shown in the sale deed was Rs. 2,000-. If at all advalorem court-fee is required to be paid, it is to be on the consideration mentioned in the sale deed, viz., Rs. 2,000/- and not on the current market value of the suit land; particularly when the suit was filed as far back as in the year 1981.

The Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the suit is for the possession of killas Nos. 1938/850/2 and 1939/850/2 and since the said land is assessed to land revenue, the plaintiffs paid the court fee accordingly i.e., ten times the land revenue so payable. According to the Learned Counsel, the view taken by the trial court in this behalf was wrong. The full Bench judgment of this Court in Surjit Kumar''s case (supra) was not applicable to the facts of the present case. The Learned Counsel also submitted that since the plaintiffs had also sought declaration to the effect that the sale deed dated February 24, 1965, was a fraudulent one, at the most, they could be directed to pay advalorem court fee on the sale price given therein in view of the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Niranjan Kaur v. Nirbigan Kaur 1981 RLR 428, as the case will be covered under Article I, Schedule I of the Court fees Act.

In the plaint, the plaintiffs claimed possession of killas Nos. 193/850/2 and 1939/850/2 and since the said land is assessed to land revenue as is evident from Exhibit P10, a copy of the jamabandi for the year 1977-78, the court fee has been rightly paid at ten times the land revenue thereof, as regards the possession of the land.

As regards the declaration that the sale deed dated February 24, 1965, was fraudulent which in other words means that the plaintiffs want the cancellation of the same, they will have to pay the court fee on the sale price given in the sale deed, i.e. Rs. 2,000/-.

Consequently, this revision petition succeeds to the extent indicated above and the impugned order of the trial court is set aside accordingly. The plaintiffs are directed to pay the advalorem court fee on the sale price of the said deed as given therein i.e., Rs. 2,000/- within two months. The parties have been directed to appear in the trial court on January 31, 1989, for further proceedings.