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

1937 Supreme(Mad) 382

ALFRED HENRY LIONEL LEACH


ORDER

Alfred Henry Lionel Leach, C.J.

1. This reference raises the much discussed question of the bearing of Section 7(iv)(f)of the Court-Fees Act of 1870 when the defendant is the appellant. In a suit for recovery of possession of immovable property and for an account filed in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Madura the plaintiff valued his relief, so far as it concerned his claim for an account, at Rs. 3,000. He obtained a preliminary decree, which was followed in due course by a final decree, by which he was declared to be entitled to recover a total sum of Rs. 32,000. The preliminary decree was challenged on appeal to the District Court of Madura, but this appeal had not been decided at the time of the passing of the final decree by the trial Court. An appeal against the final decree was also filed, and the District Court heard the two appeals together. The result was that the decree of the trial Court, so far as it directed the payment of money, was varied, it being held that the plaintiff was only entitled to recover Rs. 6,554-5-2. The defendants concerned then appealed to this Court and valued their relief at Rs. 100, paying the court-fee of Rs. 11-3-0 thereon. This valua










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