The jurisdictional value of an appeal is determined by the amount of the condition which the appellant seeks to get removed in a conditional decree.

Kapur, J.

1. This is an appeal against a judgment and decree of Mr. Pitam Singh Jain, Sub-ordinate Judge 1st Class, Tarn Taran, dated 2-5-1950 decreeing the plaintiffs suit to the extent of 1317216th share on the plaintiffs paying a sum of Rs. 5,535/5/8 to defendant 1.

2. The facts of the case are that on the death of one Hazara Singh, his mother, Mst. chandi, succeeded to the estate. She sold the land in dispute to defendant 1 and defendants 2 to 20 filed a suit for declaration challenging this sale and a declaratory decree was obtained against defendant 1 on 15-4-1941 to the effect that the sale shall not bind the reversionary rights of the plaintiffs after the death of Mst. Chandi. This decree was affirmed right up to the High Court. When Chandi died defendants 2 to 4 and 6 to 20 sold the land in suit measuring 5 kanals 14 marlas out of khasra No. 469 to the plaintiffs for Rs. 18,000/- on 13-3-1945. The plaintiffs brought this suit for possession of the land measuring 5 kanals 14 marlas with a prayer that the defendant should remove the material on it. The suit was decreed to the extent of 131/216th share on the payment of Rs. 5,535/5/8.

3. Against this decree Dina Nath plaintiff went up in appeal to the Senior Subordinate Judge and an objection was taken that the appeal lay to the High Court and not to the Senior Subordinate Judges Court. Appellants counsel, however, conceded in the Court of the Senior Sub-Judge that the appeal was beyond the power of the Senior Subordinate Judges Court and. the memorandum of appeal was returned to be filed in a Court of proper jurisdiction. This was on 27-6-1951. The appeal was filed in that Court on 10-7-1950.

4. On 7-7-1951 the memorandum of appeal was presented to this Court. The appeal was admitted by my learned brother Harnam Singh J. on 1-8-1951 and he ordered that before the printing was done the case should be put before a Bench to decide the question of limitation.

5. Mr. Shambu Lal Puri for the appellant submits that there was a bona fide mistake on the part of the Advocate for the plaintiff in filing the appeal in the Court of the Senior Subordinate Judge. The jurisdictional value as put on the memorandum of appeal was Rs. 28/2/- and his prayer was for getting the whole of the land in suit without the payment of any money and by removal of the superstructures. This appeal he submits lay to the Senior Subordinate Judge, but I am unable to agree with this submission. In the present case the decree was a conditional one, the condition being the payment of Rs. 5,535/5/8 and the appellant wanted to get rid of this condition. He had therefore to value the appeal according to this sum because the court-fee was payable on this amount. This has been stated in Chitaleys boob on the Court-fees Act at page 431 under Sch. I, Art. 1, Note 7. In support of the statement of the law there is the judgment of the Madras High Court in -- Abdul Kudus v. Abdul Gani, AIR 1940 Mad 955 (A), where it was held that the appellant who seeks only to get rid of an order for payment of a sum of money should value his appeal at the amount of that sum of money.

In a Lahore case -- Tikkan Ram v. Bosa Ram, AIR 1922 Lah 440 (B) a Division Bench of the Lahore High Court held that it is quite immaterial in what form the suit was originally brought, provided the decree against which the appeal is presented attaches a definite condition as to the payment of a specified sum and if the decree is in such a form, the relief sought being the removal of this condition precedent, court-fee must be paid on the amount so fixed. In this case the extension of time was refused to be granted even though the mistake was due to the mistake of a counsel of the status of Dr. Nank Lal and reliance was there placed on a judgment of the same Court In Lekh Ram v. Ramji Das, AIR 1920 Lah 92 (C), where the Court refused to extend the time even though the opinion had been given by a gentleman of the status of Dr. Gokal Chand. The Pat