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

1966 Supreme(P&H) 212

R.S.NARULA, D.K.MAHAJAN, S.K.KAPUR
Jai Krishna Das – Appellant
Versus
Babu Ram – Respondent


Judgment

R.S.Narula, J.

1. The short question which calls for decision in this reference to the Full Bench is whether fixed Court-fees under Article 17(iii) or (vi) of Schedule II (as paid by the plaintiff-petitioners) or ad valorem Court-fees on the value of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- (one crore) under Section 7(iv) (c) of the Court Fees Act VII of 1870, as amended by Punjab Act 31 of 1953 (as directed by the trial Court in its order under revision) is payable on the plaint of the suit filed by Jaikishan Dass and his two sons (plaintiff-petitioners) against Babu Ram and 34 others (defendant-respondents) for a simple declaration to the effect "that the plaintiffs are members of the Joint Hindu family Panna Lal Girdhar Lal as per pedigree table (Schedule A attached to the plaint) owning joint family business as enumerated in Schedule B and the properties as given in Schedule C and are entitled to enforce the right to share in them as members of the Joint Hindu family". (The prayer in the plaint has been quoted by me verbatim in the last sentence for facility of reference). The heading of the plaint is -- "Suit for declaration of plaintiffs status and rights as members of the Joint Hindu famil








































































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