IMPORTANT POINT
The direction to correct the valuation under Section 11 of the Rajasthan Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961 is not revisable under Section 115 CPC.

JUDGMENT :

1. The petitioners are plaintiffs of the Civil Original Suit No.127/2018. The defendant-respondents appeared in the said suit and filed their written statement-cum-counter claim. The plaintiff-petitioners raised objection that the counter claim has been under-valued; unless the defendants correct the valuation of counter claim to the tune of Rs.15,00,000/-, the counter claim is not maintainable. Therefore, prayer was made to ask the defendants to raise the valuation and pay the court fee accordingly, consistent with the requirement of Section 11 of the Rajasthan Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961. The plaintiff-petitioners further prayed that in the event of default, the plaint be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC.

Vide impugned order dated 25.08.2023, the Court below has rejected the prayer of the plaintiff-petitioners. The Court below noticed the judgments of this Court in Smt. Cheina and Ors. Vs Nirbhay Singh reported in RLW 1997 (1) Raj. 688 as well as Smt. Geeta Devi Vs Shri Gopal Krishan Vashistha and Anr. reported in RLW 1996 (1) Raj. 460 in support of its view that the question is a mixed question of law and fact and can be decided only after evidence as one of the issues.

2. Learned counsel for the plaintiff-petitioners submits that the Court below has acted against the mandate of law contained in Section 11 of the Rajasthan Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961 and judgment of this Court in Mokham Chand Dasot & Anr Vs ADJ 3 Jaipur City reported in 2006 (3) RLW 1858.

3. The provision of Section 11 of Rajasthan Court Fees and Suits Valuation reads as follows:-

“Sec. 11. Decision as to proper fee. – (1) In every suit instituted in any Court, the Court shall, before ordering the plaint to be registered, decide on the materials and allegations contained in plaint and on the materials contained in the statement, if any, filed under section 10, the proper fee payable thereon, the decision being however subject to review, further review and correction in the manner specified in the succeeding sub-sections.

(2) Any defendant may plead that the subject-matter of the suit has not been property valued or that the fee paid is not sufficient. All questions arising on such pleas shall be heard and decided before the hearing of the suit as contemplated by Order XVIII in the First Schedule to the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Central Act 5 of 1908). If the Court decides that the subject-matter of the suit has not been properly valued or that the fee paid is not sufficient, the Court shall fix a date before which the plaint shall be amended in accordance with the Court's decision and the deficit fee shall be paid. If the plaint be not so amended or if the deficit fee be not paid within the time allowed, the plaint shall be rejected and the Court shall pass such order as it deems just regarding costs of the suit.

(3) A defendant added after issues have been framed on the merits of the claim may, in the written statement filed by him, plead that the subject-matter of the suit has not been properly valued or that the fee paid is not sufficient. All questions arising on such pleas shall be heard and decided before evidence is recorded affecting such defendant on the merits of the claim, and if the Court finds that the subject-matter of the suit has not been properly valued or that the fee paid is not sufficient, the Court shall follow the procedure laid down in sub-section (2).

Explanation.- Nothing in this sub-section shall apply to a defendant added as a successor or a representative in interest of a defendant who was on record before issues were framed on the merits of the claim and who had an opportunity to file a written statement pleading that the subject-matter of the suit was not properly valued or that the fee paid was not sufficient.

(4)(a) Wherever a case comes up before a Court of Appeal, it shall be lawful for such Court, either of its own motion or on the application of any of the parties, to consider the corre