A claim for adjustment is different from a plea of set-off in that it alleges that the plaintiff's claim has already been discharged or satisfied to the extent of the claim and so no longer subsists.

( 1 ) THIS is a Civil Revision Petition to revise the order dated 2-3-1977 in suit No. 125 of 1976 deciding a preliminary issue framed by the Court and directing the defendant to pay court-fee on a sum of Rs. 2,875 in the following circumstances.

( 2 ) THE plaintiff was the owner of premises No. F 25 Nizamudin West New Delhi. The defendants were the legal representatives of Sri Daulat Ram who was the tenant of the premises. The tenancy was terminated by the plaintiff by a notice dated 1-9-1975 and a petition for eviction under the Delhi Rent Control Act was also filed before the Rent Controller, Delhi. It is stated that the eviction order was duly passed and possession was also taken by the landlord on the 30th July 1976.

( 3 ) IN the meantime the landlord also filed suit No. 125 of 1976 on the 30th June, 1976, in the Court of the Senior Sub. Judge, Delhi for the recovery of Rs. 2,875 with costs. This represented a claim for the arrears of rent of Rs. 2,700 for the period from 1-9-1975 to 29-2rl976, interest of Rs. 110 on the above sum and Rs. 65 by way of notice charges. In paragraphs 5 and 6 of the plaint it was stated that the rent for the above period had fallen due and not been paid in spite of demands therefor. The plaintiff therefore prayed for a decree for the sum of Rs. 2,875 and costs.

( 4 ) THE defendants filed a written-statement. The facts regarding the tenancy as set out by the landlord and also the fact that the rents had not been paid upto 1st September 1975 were admitted. In paragraph 5 of the written-statement however it was claimed that the defendants had spent a sum of Rs. 4,170. 61 on the premises in question for expanding the main gate, for installing additional power-load, for white washing and painting the premises and for certain repairs. It was stated that these payments were supported by documentary evidence and that as a result of this expenditure the utility, beauty and value of the premises have been considerably enhanced. It was claimed that the defendants were "legally entitled to adjust these payments from the plaintiff" It was alleged in paragraph 7 that the plaintiff had not adjusted these expenses but had rushed to the court with his claim only and that the defendants were entitled "to refund of the amount spent on the premises in question. " In view of the above, it was prayed that the suit should be dismissed with costs,

( 5 ) THE learned trial Judge framed a preliminary issue as to whether the defendants were liable to pay court fee for the claim of adjustment made in the written-statement. After hearing arguments he came to the conclusion that the defendant was liable to pay court-fee. However, having regard to the fact that though the defendants claimed to have spent Rs. 4,170. 61 they had claimed adjustment only to the extent of Rs. 2,875 and had not filed any further claim for the balance, he directed that the defendants should pay ad-valorem court-fee on the sum of Rs. 2,875. It is against this decision of the sub Judge that this revision petition has been filed.

( 6 ) ON behalf of the petitioner it is contended that the claim raised in the written- statement was only a defence to the plaintiff s action. It was only plea of "adjustment" and cannot be regarded as a claim for set off falling within order 8, Rule 6 and Art. I of Schedule I to the Court Fees Act.

( 7 ) ORDER VIII Rule 6, of the Civil Procedure Code permits the defendant in a money suit to claim a "set off against the plaintiff s demand" in the suit of "any ascertained sum of money legally recoverable by him from the plaintiff" A written statement claiming such a set off will have the same effect as a cross- suit. Rule 6-A introduced in Order VIII by the recent amendment makes a provision in respect of a counter-claim. Art. 1 in Schedule 1 of the Court Fees Act provides that where a written statement pleads a set off or a counter claim, ad-valorem court-fee in respect of the amount so claimed is payable. In t