JACKSON
In Re: Venkitakrishna Pattar – Appellant
Versus
Unknown – Respondent
Jackson, J.
1. Petitioner seeks to stay proceedings in O. S. No. 76 of 1926 on the file of the Court of the District Munsif of Palghat pending the revision of a question of Court-fee proper to the suit.
2. The plaintiffs sue for a declaration of rights of way and drainage over a certain paramba and for a mandatory injunction ordering defendants to remove the fences walls, etc., that have been built in defiance of the said rights.
3. The plaintiffs sought to value their suit under Section 7, Clause (4) (d) (Court-fees Act 7 of 1870) as if it were a simple suit for injunction. The District Munsif has correctly pointed out that it is a suit for declaration, and consequential relief falling under Section 7 (4) (c). He has then held applying the Madras proviso, that as the relief sought is with reference to immovable property the valuation shall not be less than half the value of the immovable property calculated in the manner provided for by para. 5 of the section. Accordingly plaintiffs have been ordered to pay half the value of the paramba, which they have reckoned according to Section 7, Clause 5 (b) at five times the revenue. The petitioner 9th defendant, contends that the value
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.