Proper valuation of a suit for jurisdictional purposes is essential for the court to determine its pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain the suit.

( 1 ) [ed facts : Plaintiff had sued Deft. for declaration that parties marriage performed on 20. 4. 84 was legal and any subsequent marriage is void. He had valued the suit for purposes of jurisdiction at Rs. 1. 10 lakh. Deft. raised a preliminary objection that suit is not triable by High Court as it is not properly valued. He relied on the Rules made by High Court on the subject] Para 4 onwards, judgment is : 4. Chapter 3, part C of Delhi High Court Rules (Practice and Procedure)-Part IV" lays down the method and deals with such types of suits as to how they are to be valued. It lays down the Rules made by the High Court with the previous sanction of the State Govt, under the powers conferred by section 9 of the Suits Valuation Act, 1887, and all other powers in that behalf, for determining for the purposes specified therein, the value of the subject-matter of certain classes of suits which do not admit of being satisfactorily valued, and for the treatment of such classes of suits as if their subject-matter were of the value as hereinafter stated :

1. (i) Suits in which the plaint asks for a decree against the other party to an alleged marriage, either along or with other defendants, for restitution of conjugal rights. (ii) Similar suits for a decree establishing, annuling or dissolving a marriage or for a declaration that a marriage is void or has been annulled, dissolved or otherwise terminated. (iii) Suits in which the plaintiff in the plaint asks for a decree establishing an adoption or declaring it void including under the expression "adoption" the customary appointment of an heir. Value- (a) For the purposes of Court fees Act-Rs. 200. 00 (b) For the purposes of Suits Valuation Act, 1887 and the Punjab Courts Act, 1918, Rs. 1,000. 00

( 2 ) WITH the above background let us now see as to how the plaintiff has valued the present suit ?

( 3 ) THE plaintiff has, through the present suit, claimed a declaration that the marriage performed on 20. 1. 1981 between the plaintiff and defendant No. 1 is absolutely legal, valid and the plaintiff and the defendant No. 1 have a legal status of husband and wife and any subsequent marriage is illegal and void. Such a claim for declaration would be covered by Rule (1) (ii) of Part c , Chapter 3 of Delhi High Court Rules (Practice and Procedure) Part II in as much as the plaintiff herein is claiming a declaration that the marriage dated 20. 4. 1984 be declared as legal and valid. Thus I feel that the present suit should have been valued at Rs. 1,000. 00for the purposes of Suits Valuation Act, 1887 and for the payment of Court fees at Rs, 200. 00, Astonishingly enough the plaintiff for the best reasons known to him valued the suit for the purposes of jurisdiction at Rs. 1,10,000. 00 presumably to bring the case within the pecuniary jurisdiction of this Court. To my mind this is not proper. In fact, the suit as is manifest from the above, should have been valued at Rs. 1,000. 00 for the purposes of Suits Valuation Act and for payment of Court Fees at Rs. 200. 00.

( 4 ) IN the circumstances, stated above, I am of the view that this Court has got no pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain the present suit and the plaint is thus liable to be returned to the plaintiff for presentation to proper Court.