SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

1982 Supreme(AP) 487

Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : RAMASWAMY
Krishna Pratap Rao - Appellant
Versus
Madgi Pochaiah - Respondent
C.R.P. 1513/82
Decided On : 12-08-82
Advocates Appeared :
Mr. S. Venkateswara Rao,Mr. A. Suryanarayana Murthy

Act Referred

ANDHRA PRADESH COURT FEES AND SUITS VALUATION ACT : S.26(a), S.26(c)
TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT : S.3

Headnote

AP COURT FEES AND SUITS VALUATION ACT, 1956, Sec 26(a) and (c) - and Transfer of Property Act, Sec 3 - Suit for declaration restraining the defendants from felling gulmohra trees on their patta lands - Plaint has to be valued at half of the market value Of the trees under Sec 26(c) - Sec 26 (a) not applicable

       Held: The proper valuation of the plaint is to be based on the value of the total number of trees in respect of which injunction is sought for, and Court-fee has to be paid thereon The Gulmohra trees are only timber fit for being used as building material The definition of Immoveable property excludes standing timber, therefore, it is not an immoveable property, then Sec 26(a) of the Andhra Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, has no application to the facts of the case The plaintiffs by virtue of an Injunction that is sought for are entitled to get advantage of retention of the trees standing on their patta lands If that be the advantage, then they have to value the trees standing on their patta lands and determine the valuation of the suit and pay Court-fee thereon under sec 26(c) of the Act,

       GRP Allowed

Krishna Pratap Rao vs Madgi Pochaiah - 1982 Supreme(AP) 487
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top