SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1982 Supreme(Pat) 136

B.P.JHA
Kesha Mahton – Appellant
Versus
Ayodhya Mahton – Respondent


Judgment

B.P.Jha, J.

1. I shall dispose of these two civil revision petitions by a common judgment as a common point of law arises for consideration in both these civil revision petitions.

2. The point for consideration is:

Whether the valuation given by the plaintiffs under Section 7(iv)(c) of the Court Fees Act (hereafter referred to as the Act) is to be accepted, or, whether the Court has jurisdiction to interfere with this valuation on the ground that it is not a reasonable one ?

3. In this connection, learned Counsel for the petitioners relied on the following decisions, namely, Gauri Shanker Mahansaria V/s. Union of India and Ors. 1980 Bihar Law Journal Reports 455., Smt. Prem Kishori Devi V/s. The State of Bihar 1981 Bihar Bar Council Journal 531, Secretary, Managing Committee, Dwarkanath High School, Mazaffarpur, and Ors. V/s. Gaurishankar Jha and Ors. Civil Revision No. 388 of 1979, disposed of on 20th September, 1979, Shree Thakur Durga Narainjee Asthapit Mandir and Anr. V/s. Surendra Prasad Sah and Ors. Civil Revision No. 1141 of 1980. disposed of on 24th March, 1982, Arunchalam Chetty and Ors. V/s. kangasamy Pillai A.I.R. 1915 Madras 948, (F.B), Chelasami Ramiah V/s. Che





















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top