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

2011 Supreme(Mad) 1537

K.K.SASIDHARAN
Minor Divya – Appellant
Versus
Sengamalai – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners:Jayaramana Krishnan, Advocate. For the Respondents:Ms. P. Veena, Advocate.

Judgment :-

1. Introductory :-

This Civil Revision Petition raises a question, "whether the expression "value of the property" for which the document was executed" as provided under Section 40 of the Tamil Nadu Court Fees and Suits Evaluation Act means the market value of the property or the value specified in the document.

Relevant facts :-

2. The petitioners filed a civil suit in O.S.No.54/1997 before the learned Subordinate Judge, Ariyalur, praying for a decree, directing partition of the suit property into 90 shares and to allot 18 such shares to them with separate possession and enjoyment. The other prayer was to grant a decree of cancellation of the partition deed dated 24 May 1996 in respect of suit A and B Schedule properties.

3. The suit records were examined by the Court Fee Examiner, High Court, Madras, and a check slip was issued directing the Trial Court to collect additional Court Fee. The said check slip was considered by the learned Judge. The learned Judge was of the view that the petitioners have to pay Court fee for the relief of cancellation of the deed of partition. According to the learned Judge, Court Fee should be paid on the market rate under Section 40 of the

























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