In a suit for injunction, the value of the suit for the purpose of jurisdiction and for the purpose of court fees is one and the same.

V. RAJAGOPALA REDDY, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioners, who are plaintiffs, laid the suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from laying any road in the plaint schedule land. They made a notional value at Rs. 1,000/- for the relief claimed and a Court fee of Rs. 111/- was paid, u/sec. 26 (c) of A-P. Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1956 (for short, the Act ). For the purpose of jurisdiction the market value of the subject matter was shown as Rs. 67,000/- and therefore the suit came to be filed before the Subordinate Judge s Court, Rajam.

( 2 ) THE inspecting staff of the District Court issued a check slip stating that the suit having been valued at Rs. 67,000/- for the purpose of jurisdiction, since the pecuniary jurisdiction of Subordinate Judge s Court commences from rs 50,000/- the Court fee should be paid on Rs. 67,000/ -. The petitioners filed objections maintaining that the Court fee paid by them was proper as it is in accordence with the provisions of the Act. The learned Sub-ordinate Judge, rejected the objections and directed the petitioners to pay the Court fee on rs. 67,000/- Hence the C. R. P.

( 3 ) IT is contended that the suit can be differently valued, one for the purpose of Court Fees and another for the purpose of jurisdiction. The value shown for the purpose of Court fees is under the Act, on the value of the relief sought for and the value shown for the purpose of jurisdiction is under the A. P. Civil courts Act, 1972, on the market value of the subject matter. Therefore, the petitioners are not liable to pay Court fees on the value shown for the purpose of jurisdiction, but only on the value shown for the purpose of Court fees.

( 4 ) THE short question that arises is whether the petitioners are liable to pay the Court fees on the basis of the market value of the subject matter given for the purpose of jurisdiction, in the suit for injunction, u/sec. 26 (c) of the Act?

( 5 ) IT is generally true that there can be two valuations, one for the purpose of Court fees and another for the purpose of jurisdiction as held in Gunna venkataratnam vs. Gunna Kesava Rao. But the position with regard to a suit for injunction,the Court fees payableu/sec. 26 (c)of the Actappears to be different.

( 6 ) SECTIONS 26 (c) and 50 of the Act are relevant in this context and they are extracted hereunder:"26. SUITS FOR INJUNCTION: In a suit for injunction (a ). . . . . . (b ). . . . . . (c) in any other case, whether the subject matter of the suit has a market value or not, fee shall be computed on the amount at which the relief sought is valued in the plaint or at which such relief is valued by the court, whichever is higher. ""50. SUITS NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR: (1) If no specific provision is made in this Act or any other law regarding the value of any suit for the purpose of determining the jurisdiction of courts, value for that purpose and value for the purpose of computing the fee payable under this Act shall be the same. (2) In a suit where fee is payable under this Act at a fixed rate, the value for the purpose of determining the jurisdiction of Courts shall be the market value of the movable property or three-fourths of the market value of the immovable property or where it is not possible to estimate it at a money value the amount stated in the plaint. "

( 7 ) IT is, therefore, see that under Sec. 26 (c) of the Act, the fees has to be valued (sic. computed) on the amount at which the relief sought is valued by the plaintiffs. It is valued at Rs. 1,000/- and a Court fees of Rs. 111/- has been paid. This provision occurs in Chapter-IV which relates to computation of fee. Chapter-V of the Act deals with valuation of fee. Chapter-V of the Act deals with valuation of suits. Sec. 50 occurs in this Chapter. This provision, is applicable to suits where there is no provision in the Act or in any other law regarding the value of the suit for the purpose of determining jurisdiction of Courts. Then, in those suits, the valu

Click Here to Read the rest of this document