JUDGMENT :

(Anil Kshetarpal, J.) :-

With the consent of the learned counsel representing the parties, two connected revision petitions shall stand disposed of by a common order.

2. The issue which arises for consideration is whether the ad valorem court fee is payable on the amount of mesne profit claimed for use and occupation of the premises during the pendency of the suit particularly when no arrears have been claimed with respect to the period prior to the suit?

3. The trial court has directed the plaintiff (petitioner) to pay ad valorem court fee on the amount of Rs.40,000/- per month as claimed in the suit as mesne profit from the date of filing of the suit till April, 2023. The correctness of such order is challenged in these revision petitions.

4. This Bench has heard the learned counsel representing the parties at length and with their able assistance perused the paper book.

5. The learned counsel representing the petitioner submits that the amount of court fee with respect to the period during the pendency of the suit is not required to be paid on ad valorem basis. He submits that there is no provision in the Court Fee Act, 1870 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the 1870 Act’),