Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Ramesam, J.
Kommuru Venkata Rao
Versus
Korella Sesharattama
Decided On : 17.08.1934
Court-fees Act - Declaration of Interest in Promissory Notes - Interpretation of Section 7, Clause 4(a)
Fact of the Case:
The suit is for a declaration that the person really interested in the promissory notes is the plaintiff and not the defendant, and for the recovery of the notes but not for the recovery of the money due on the notes.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that under Section 7, Clause 4(a) of the Court-fees Act, the plaintiff is not required to pay court-fees on the value of the notes, as the value of the notes is not the money due on the notes but only evidentiary. The plaintiff stated the value of the relief sought to be Rs. 500, and the court set aside the order of the Subordinate Judge, finding that the plaintiff does not have to pay additional court-fees.
Issues: Interpretation of Section 7, Clause 4(a) of the Court-fees Act, and determination of whether the plaintiff is required to pay court-fees on the value of the promissory notes.
Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted Section 7, Clause 4(a) of the Court-fees Act to hold that the plaintiff is not required to pay court-fees on the value of the notes, as the value is only evidentiary and not the money due on the notes.
Final Decision: The court set aside the order of the Subordinate Judge and found that the plaintiff does not have to pay additional court-fees, and no costs were awarded in the petition.
Ramesam, J.
1. I do not agree with the view taken by the Subordinate Judge and the court-fee examiner. This suit is for a declaration that the person re-ally interested in the promissory notes is the plaintiff and not the defendant though they stand in the defendants name and for recovery of the notes but not for the recovery of the money due [on the notes. The makers of the notes are parties so that the finding may be binding on them also. Section 7, Clause 4 (a), Court-fees Act, is the clause applicable and not Clause 3 as the Subordinate -Judge seems to think.
2. Under Section 7, Clause 4(a), Court-fees Act, the plaintiff has not got to pay court-fees on the value of the notes. The value of the notes is not the money due on the notes. Their value is only evidentiary. The plaintiff has got to state the value at which he values the relief sought. He has stated it to be Rs. 500. I set aside the order of the Subordinate Judge and find that the plaintiff has not to pay additional court-fees. I do not see that I should make the respondent liable for the costs. I am not able to see that I can make any other person liable for costs. There will be no order as to costs (in this petition).
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
