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

2008 Supreme(Raj) 1687

VINEET KOTHARI
LRs. of Surja Ram – Appellant
Versus
LRs. of Asha Ram – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellant:G.R. Punia, Advocate.
For the Respondent:S.L. Jain, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

1. - Heard on applications, whereby the respondents have raised an objection that the appellants-plaintiffs have not deposited adequate Court fee on the basis of market value of the suit property which according to the respondents in one suit on the stated market value of Rs. 5,00,000/- would come to Rs. 25065/-, whereas the plaintiffs-appellants have paid the Court fee only at of the said amount i.e. Rs. 12565/- The respondents have, therefore, prayed that the appeal is not maintainable and the same deserves to be dismissed.

2. The learned counsel for the respondents Mr. S.L. Jain drawing attention of the Court towards Section 38 of the Rajasthan Court fee and Suit Valuation Act, 1961 has submitted that in a suit for cancellation of decree for money or other property having a money value or other document relating to right, title or interest in the immovable property, the Court fee has to be paid on the market value of the suit property in question. He submitted that since the plaintiffs-appellants have prayed for cancellation of sale-deed, executed in favour of the defendant No. 3. The aforesaid Court fee of Rs. 25,065/- was required to be paid by the plaintiff-appellants









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