High Courts

Rash Mohan Lal vs Ram Mohan Lal

Patna High Court · Decided on 15 May 1919 · Citation: (1919) 05 PAT CK 0006

RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Privy Council Appeal No. 104 of 1918
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

2 paragraphs · 337 words
1.

This application must be dismissed. The plaintiffs seek leave to appeal to His Majesty in Council from a decree of this Court, dated the 8th April 1918, affirming a decision of the Subordinate Judge of Cuttack.

2.

The suit was valued by the plaintiffs in the Court of first instance at a sum of Rs. 7,950. They contend now that the value of the property in respect to which the suit was brought has increased and that its present market value is close upon Rs. 12,000, and we are asked to send the case down to the Subordinate Judge to report upon the amount or value of the subject--matter of the suit. The plaintiffs do not contend that at the time when the suit was instituted the value of the subject matter of the suit was more than that stated in the plaint, namely, Rs. 7,950. Their only contention is that at the present moment the value is in excess of Rs. 10,000. It seems to us quite clear that even if the petitioners could succeed in proving that the market value of the property in suit has gone up, that would not be sufficient to bring the case within the provisions of section 110 of the Civil Procedure Code. According to that section two conditions must be complied with before the Court can grant a certificate. The first is that the amount or value of the subject-matter of the suit in the Court of first instance must be Rs. 10,000 or upwards, and the second is that the amount or value of the subject-matter in dispute on appeal to His Majesty in Council must be the same sum or upwards. It is admitted in this case that it cannot be proved, whatever enquiry may take place, that the case comes within the first of these conditions. Therefore, it seems quite useless to send the case back to the Subordinate Judge for enquiry and this application must be dismissed with costs. Hearing fee three gold mohurs.