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

2001 Supreme(Mad) 506

D.MURUGESAN
Laljivora – Appellant
Versus
Srividya – Respondent


Appearing Advocates:T. R. Rajaraman, M. Sundar, Advocates.

Judgment :-

The Order of the Court was as follows :

The above civil revision petition has been filed challenging the order and decree dated 6-11-2000 made in I.A. No. 67 of 2000 in O.S. No. 435 of 1996 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Melur. The 6th defendant in the suit is the civil revision petitioner. The respondent filed a suit seeking for a relief of declaration of several sale deeds executed by the defendants 1 and 2 in favour of the defendants 3 to 10 on various dates are not valid and binding on the plaintiffs since the suit was valued under Section 25(d) of the Tamil Nadu Court-fees and Suits Valuation Act (Act XIV of 1955) hereinafter called as "The Act". According to the petitioner who was the 6th defendant in the suit, the suit ought to have been valued under Section 40 of the Act and if the suit is valued under Section 40 of the Act, the Court-fees should be paid on the market value of the suit property and in such event the learned District Munsif, Melur may not have the jurisdiction. Therefore, the 6th defendant filed I.A. No. 67 of 2000 under Section 12(2) of the Tamil Nadu Court-fees and Suits Valuation Act and Section 151, C.P.C. to frame an additional iss










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