K. VEERASWAMI, C. J. :- This civil revision petition comes before us on a reference by one of us, on the ground that there was a conflict of opinion on the question whether court-fee would be payable on the value of improvements effected by consent, which is claimed by the mortgagee in a suit for redemption and possession.

2. Alamelu Ammal v. Thayarammal, AIR 1961 Mad 355 held that such a claim for improvements was a counterclaim and would attract court-fee under Section 8 of the Madras Court-fees and Suits Valuation Act, Apparswami Chettiar v. Parvathavardhani Sametha Ramanatheeswara Choudambigai Amman Temple, Cuddalore, 1961-2 Mad LJ 34 : (AIR 1961 Mad 527) differed from that view and thought that such a claim would not be a counter-claim and no court-fee would be payable. Subramanian Chettiar v. Shanmugham, 1966-1 Mad LJ 200 : (AIR 1967 Mad 300) shared the view of 1961-2 Mad LJ 34 : (AIR 1961 Mad 527). A counter-claim is one based on an independent cause of action which distinguishes it from a set off, which will generally arise as a part of the transaction giving rise to the cause of action for the suit. As pointed out by Abdul Majid v. Abdul Rashid, AIR 1950 All 201, t