IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Alka Sarin, J.
Sachin Sharma - Appellant
Versus
Indu Sharma & Ors. – Respondents
CR No. 4511 of 2018
Decided On : 12-05-2022
Court Fee - Civil Procedure - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Order VII Rule 11 - Section 7(1)(iii) of the Court-fees Act - Section 149 of the Code - [Order VII Rule 11, Section 7(1)(iii), Section 149]
Fact of the Case:
The plaintiff filed a suit for mandatory injunction and damages. The defendant filed an application for rejection of the plaint for want of appropriate court fee. The plaintiff contended that the damages were not quantified and hence, the court fee was affixed as Rs.50/- with the assertion to pay the court fee as per the court's order.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the damages were not quantified in the plaint and the valuation given was only tentative. It held that the payment of court fee is a matter between the plaintiff and the court, and the plaintiff can be directed to pay the court fee as assessed after the relief is granted.
Issues: The main issue was whether the plaintiff should affix ad valorem court fee on an amount of Rs.20 lakhs when the damages were not quantified in the plaint.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the principle that in cases where the court is unable to evaluate the relief sought, the valuation put by the plaintiff shall be considered tentative. It emphasized that the court fee is a matter between the plaintiff and the state, and the plaintiff can be directed to pay the court fee as assessed after the relief is granted.
Final Decision: The impugned order directing the plaintiff to affix ad valorem court fee on an amount of Rs.20 lakhs was set aside, and the tentative court fee affixed by the plaintiff was accepted by the court.
JUDGMENT
Alka Sarin, J. (Oral) - The present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugning the order dated 06.04.2018 (Annexure P-4) passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ambala vide which the plaintiff-petitioner has been directed to affix ad valorem court fee on an amount of Rs.20 lakhs.
2. Notice of motion was issued on 18.07.2018. However, none has put in appearance on behalf of the respondents despite service.
3. Brief facts relevant to the present lis are that the plaintiff- petitioner filed a suit for decree of mandatory injunction for directing the defendant-respondents to pay damages/compensation to the plaintiff- petitioner on account of loss of reputation and malicious prosecution of the plaintiff-petitioner, his brother, Ram, and mother, Smt. Rami Devi.
4. During the pendency of the civil suit an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 was filed for rejection of the plaint for want of appropriate and requisite court fee. The case set up by the defendant-respondents was that by cleverly drafting the plaint, the suit has been given the shape of a suit for mandatory injunction. However, the suit was for damages which had been quantified as Rs.20 lakhs. The application was contested by the plaintiff-petitioner on the ground that the exact value of the relief was not ascertainable at the stage of filing of the plaint and the damages were not quantified and hence, the court fee was affixed as Rs.50/- and a specific assertion was made that as and when the damages would be assessed by the Court the deficient court fee would be paid by the plaintiff-petitioner.
5. Learned counsel for the plaintiff-petitioner has pointed out to the plaint, which has been annexed as Annexure P-1, wherein neither in the heading of the plaint nor in the prayer clause the damages have been quantified. In fact para 15 of the plaint reads as under :
"15. That the quantum of damages is more than Rs.20 lacs but since exact value of the relief to be granted could not be ascertained and the quantification of damages is yet to be determined by this Hon'ble Court Hence tentative court fee of Rs.50/- has been affixed on the plaint by leaving final adjudication to be made by the trial court & the plaintiff is ready to pay the court fee as per the order of this Hon'ble Court."
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that since the damages have not been quantified hence the question of paying the ad valorem court fee did not arise in the present case. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon judgment of this Court in Manpreet Singh vs. Gurmail Singh & Ors. [2017(1) RCR (Civil) 230] to contend that the damages, which have been mentioned in paras 9 and 15, are only tentative and in fact it has been specifically stated that the damages are not ascertainable and, hence, the plaintiff-petitioner could not have been asked to pay the exact court fee at this stage.
7. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
8. In the present case, firstly there is no assessment of damages, which has been given by the plaintiff-petitioner in the plaint. The valuation given is only tentative and that too there is no prayer whatsoever wherein the damages have been quantified. It is trite that the payment of the court fee is a matter between the plaintiff and the Court and the plaintiff can be directed to pay the court fee as assessed after the relief is granted. Perusal of the plaint reveals that the damages are not being quantified, however, a vague statement has been made that the damages have been suffered by the plaintiff-petitioner of over Rs.20 lakhs. However, in para 15 it has clearly been stated that the exact value of the relief cannot be ascertained and the quantification of the damages would be determined by the Court, hence, a tentative court fee of Rs.50/- has been affixed with the plaint. At the initial stage, in a suit for malicious prosecution, there cannot be any
S. Rrn. Ar. S. Sp. Sathappa Chettiar v. S. Rm. Ar. Rm. Ramanathan Chettiar
Manpreet Singh vs. Gurmail Singh & Ors. [2017(1) RCR(Civ) 230]
The valuation of damages in a suit is tentative when the exact value of the relief cannot be ascertained, and the court fee is a matter between the plaintiff and the state, to be paid as assessed aft....
Ad valorem court fee is payable on the amount claimed in a money suit, irrespective of the final determination by the Court.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that in Suits claiming damages, the court fee payable is ad valorem according to the amount claimed, and plaintiffs cannot arbitrarily value the re....
Court fees for defamation suits must be paid ad valorem based on the claimed damage amounts, prohibiting arbitrary lower valuations prior to final adjudication.
The main legal point established is that unquantified relief for damages in a civil suit requires ad-valorem court fee according to Section 7(i) of the Court Fees Act, 1870.
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.