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

1976 Supreme(Del) 100

B.C.MISRA
SADUL-UL-NISA – Appellant
Versus
SADUL. UL-NISA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
K.K.Mittal, MAEHSVAR DAYAL, P.N.TALVAR, REKHA SHARMA, URMILA KAPUR

B. C. MISRA

( 1 ) THIS revision petition has been filed under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure by the defendants against the order of the Sub-Judge, I Class, dated 25th October, 1972, by which he has held that the value of the suit falls within his pecuniary jurisdiction.

( 2 ) THE material facts of the case lie in a narrow compass. The plaintiff respondent instituted a suit for partition and separate possession of 1/45th share, besides rendition of accounts. The valuation of the suit as given in the plaint is as follows :

"1. For the purposes of court fee, a fixed court fee of Rs. 20. 00 has been paid, as the plaintiffs are in part possession of the properties in dispute.

2. For purposes of jurisdiction Rs. 5000. 00 being equal to the market value of the interest claimed by the plaintiffs in the properties in dispute.

3. For the purposes of rendition of accounts Rs. 1000. 00 for the purposes of jurisdiction Rs. 200. 00 for purposes of court fee, on which a court fee of Rs. 20. 00 has been paid. The total court fee paid is Rs, 40. 00 on the plaint. The total value of the suit for purposes of jurisdiction is Rs. 6000. 00 "

( 3 ) THE defendant-petitioners contested the suit an














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