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

1980 Supreme(Ker) 198

Judges : M.P.MENON
COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS - Appellant
Versus
ABDURAHIMANKUTTY - Respondent
Case No : C.R.P. No. 695 of 1980
Decided On : 09/30/1980
Advocates Appeared :
P.C. Chacko; For Petitioner N. Neelakantan Namboodiri; Subramonian Namboodiri; For Respondents

The nature of the relief sought in a suit determines the applicable court fee, and the substance of the matter prevails over the form of the relief sought.

Headnote:

Customs Duty - Agency Contract - Kerala Court fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1959 - S.25, S.27

Fact of the Case:

The first respondent firm, acting as the agent of the Indian Oil Corporation, filed a suit for injunction to restrain the defendants from collecting Customs duty assessed at Rs. 48467.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the suit was for injunction and the fee paid by the plaintiff was correct.

Issues: The main issue was whether the suit was for injunction or for a declaration, which determined the applicable court fee.

Ratio Decidendi: The court referred to previous rulings to determine the nature of the relief sought and concluded that the suit was for injunction, not for a declaration.

Final Decision: The revision by the Customs Collector was dismissed, and the parties were left to bear their own costs.

Judgment :-

1. The first respondent firm was the agent of the Indian Oil Corporation for attending to the entry and clearance of tankers with the Customs and Port departments of Cochin. In 1967, the I O.C. chartered a vessel for carriage of their finished goods from Cochin to other Indian Ports. On conversion from foreign trade to coastal trade, the stores and bunkers on board the vessel became liable for Customs duty. This was assessed at Rs. 48467 and in 1979, the Revenue authorities of the State attempted to collect the amount from the 1st respondent. The firm thereupon filed O. S. No. 614/79 in the Munsiff's Court for injunction to restrain the defendants from realising the amount from it. It was alleged that the agency fee for the firm was only Rs. 250/- and that the liability to pay all charges including the Customs duty was on the I. 0. C. Court fee was paid under S.27(c) of the Kerala Court fees and Suits Valuation Act. 1959 (Act 10/60). The Collector of Customs (3rd defendant) objected to the valuation for the purposes of Court-fee and jurisdiction, contending that in substance, the plaintiff was suing for a declaration that the amount of Rs. 48467/-was not due from it and that court fee had to be paid under S.25(d)(i) of the Act. The Munsiff over-ruled the objections, and hence this revision by the Customs Collector.

2. The question decided by the Court below involves a question as to its jurisdiction also, and the revision is therefore maintainable.

3. Ss 25 and 27 of Act 10/60 read as follows:-

"25. Suits for declaration. In a suit for a declaratory decree or order, whether with or without consequential relief, not falling under S.26

(a) where the prayer is for a declaration and for possession of the property to which the declaration relates, fee shall be computed on the market value of the property or on rupees three hundred, whichever is higher;

(b) where me prayer is for a declaration and for consequential injunction and the relief sought is with reference to any immovable property, fee shall be computed on one-half of the market value of the property or on rupees three hundred, whichever is higher;

(c) where the prayer relates to the plaintiff's exclusive right to use, sell, print or exhibit any mark, name, book, picture, design or other thing and is based on an infringement of such exclusive right, fee shall be computed on the amount at which the relief sought is valued in the plaint or on rupees four hundred, whichever is higher;

(d) in other cases

(i) where the subject-matter of the suit is capable of valuation, fee shall be computed on the market value of the property, and

(ii) where the subject-matter of the suit is not capable of valuation, fee shall be computed on the amount at which the relief sought is valued in the plaint or on rupees three hundred, whichever is higher."

"27. Suits for injunction. In a suit for injunction

(a) where the relief sought is with reference to any immovable property, and (i) where the plaintiff alleges that his title to the property is denied, or

(ii) where an issue is framed regarding the plaintiff's title to the property, fee shall be computed on one-half of the market value of the property or on rupees one hundred and fifty, whichever is higher;

(b)where the prayer relates to the plaintiff's exclusive right to use, sell, print or exhibit any mark, name, book, picture, design or other thing and is based on an infringement of such exclusive right, fee shall be computed on the amount at which the relief sought is valued in the plaint or on rupees two hundred, whichever is higher;

(c) in any other case, whether the subject-matter of the suit has a market value or not, fee shall be computed on the amount at which the relief sought is valued in the plaint or on rupees one hundred and fifty, whichever is higher."

4. S.27 deals with suits for injunction. If the injunction sought for is with reference to immovable property and a question of title is also involved, court fee is payable under cla











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