JAGAT NARAYAN, J.—This is a revision application by three defendants who are contesting the present suit instituted on 10-10 64 against them and against some other defendants. The allegation of the plaintiff is that the New Cotton & Wool Pressing Factory, near Railway Station, Beawar, is a partnership concern in which the plaintiff and the defendants are partners. It is alleged that the partnership started in 1886 87 A, D. and dissolution of partnership took place on 31-7 64. The suit is for a declaration that the partnership was dissolved on 31-7-64 and for rendition of accounts. In the alternative the plaintiff has prayed that in case the court comes to the finding that the partnership was not dissolved on 31-7-64 it may be decreed for dissolution of partnership. Para 17 of the plaint runs as follows :

"That for purposes of court-fee and jurisdiction the suit is at present valued at Rs. 5000/- and court-fee thereon is paid and the plaintiff undertakes to pay further court-fee when his share of the partnership assets is ascertained and determined by the learned court."

2. The contesting defendants filed a written statement in which they did not allege that the suit had been undervalued. On the contrary the reply to para 17 of the plaint runs as follows :

"That with respect to para 17 it is submitted that the court-fee has been unnecessarily paid with a view to harass the defendants."

3. Issues were framed on 3-10-66 and on 3-3-67 the applicants got their written statement amended, but even then no amendment was sought so as to introduce an allegation that the suit had been undervalued.

4. On 15 2-68 a miscellaneous application was filed on behalf of the applicants in which it was alleged that the suit had been undervalued. This application was rejected on the finding that the suit had been properly valued. Against that order the present revision application has been filed.

5. On behalf of the plaintiff a preliminary objection has been taken that it was not open to the applicants to agitate the question of improper valuation of the suit without amending their written statement. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties about this preliminary objection and I am satisfied that it must be upheld. The relevant provisions of the Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act 1961 are reproduced below :

Sec. 10. "Statement of particulars of subject-matter of suit and plaintiffs valuation thereof—-In every suit in which the fee payable under this Act on the plaint depends on the market value of the subject-matter of the suit, the plaintiff shall file with the plaint a statement in the prescribed form of particulars of the subject-matter of the suit and his valuation thereof unless such particulars and the valuation are contained in the plaint."

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 sec. 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 properly 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 Courts 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 de

Click Here to Read the rest of this document