The subject-matter of the appeal should be interpreted in accordance with the method prescribed in Section 7(5) of the Court Fees Act for immoveable properties.

Krishnan, J.

1. This is a reference under the Court Fees Act that has been referred to me for disposal by the learned Chief Justice, the Taxing Officer having referred the matter for the decision of the Court. In this case the plaintiff obtained a decree so far as the 11th defendant, the appellant before mo is concerned for the recovery of possession of a half share of the lands sold to him under Exhibit V by his father on payment of Rs. 12,000. The appellants appeal asks this Court to hold that the plaintiff is not entitled to the lands at all and that the suit should be dismissed as against the appellant. The question raised is what is the Court fee that the appellant has to pay on his appeal. No doubt as Sir Kumaraswami Sastri, J., has remarked in Porkodi Achi In re, A.I.R. 1922 Mad. 211 at p. 214, at p. 256:

The current of authority is clearly in favour of the view that the value of an appeal is not in all cases the value of the suit as originally filed but the value of the relief granted by the decree which a party wishes to get rid of.

2. Turning to the Court Fees Act, we find the governing rule applicable to appeals is the one in Schedule I, Clause 1 of the Act. It says, leaving out the unnecessary words, the proper fee payable upon a memorandum of appeal not otherwise provided for in this Act, presented to any Civil Court except those mentioned in Section 3 with which we are not concerned, is to be calculated on the amount of value of the subject-matter in dispute. The way in which the fee is to be fixed is by taking "the amount of value of the subject-matter in dispute." The question before mo therefore really turns upon the interpretation to be put upon the expression "the subject-matter in dispute " and " its value."

3. Turning to Section 7, Clause 5 of the Court Fees Act we find that "in suits for the possession of land, houses and gardens, the Court-fee is to be calculated according to the value of the subject-matter." The same words "the value of subject-matter" are used there, and it says "such value shall be deemed to be" in the various cases referred to as mentioned in Clauses (a) to (e). In the absence of any guiding rule in the Act itself as to computing the value in appeal, I think it is proper to take the "value of the subject-matter" in Schedule I, Clause 1 as meaning the same thing as "the value; of the subject-matter" as set out in various sub-clauses of Clause 5, Section 7.

4. It is contended, however, before me that the (subject-matter in dispute in this appeal is not the land but the market value of the land reduced by Rs. 12,000 which had already been declared as payable to the appellant. I am unable to accede to this argument. In my view the subject-matter of the appeal is the land itself, as the appellant is seeking to get rid of a decree against him which has given the respondent the right to recover the possession of the land from him. He does not seek to get the amount which the lower Court has directed to be paid to him increased by any sum of money in which case no doubt the difference between what he claims in appeal and what the lower Court has granted to him would be the subject-matter of the appeal. But here what the appellant claims is the land itself and his contention in appeal is that the land should not be taken away from him under any circumstances. He is not asking in the appeal, that the condition laid down by the lower Court should in any way be varied. But he wants the suit itself to be dismissed as regards the claim for the land in his possession is concerned. Such being his prayer in appeal, I must hold that the land itself is the subject-matter of the appeal and for purposes of valuation the rule laid down in Section 7, Clause 5, in various clauses as applying to the various immoveable properties, land, houses and gardens should be applied in this case. The lands here are partly inam lands and partly jirayati lands, and therefore they will have to be valued under Clauses (