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

1956 Supreme(All) 291

D. N. ROY
Joti Prasad and after his death Khazanchi – Appellant
Versus
Kailash Nath – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Kedar Nath Sinha, For the Appellant / Prem Narain Shukla, For the Respondent

JUDGMENT

D.N. Roy, J. - This first appeal from order is styled as an appeal u/s 6A of the Court Fees Act. It arises out of an order passed by the Munsif on the 7th of August, 1951 by which the Munsif held that the two houses in suit should have been valued at Rs. 6,130 and this together with Rs. 900 claimed by the Plaintiff for mesne profits would bring the entire valuation to a sum of Rs. 7,030. Upon that finding the Munsif directed that the plaint be returned to the Plaintiff for presentation before the proper court as the suit was outside the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Munsif.

2. An appeal u/s 6A of the Court Fees Act is competent only when a person is called upon to make good the deficiency in court fee That is not the order which has been passed by the Munsif In a case of this nature if a matter is undervalued and an objection is raised that the court-fee paid is insufficient and the court has no jurisdiction to entertain the suit, the court must proceed to determine the correct valuation of the suit. If the court reaches the conclusion that the suit is under valued, the plaint must be returned for presentation to proper court. The court will not have jurisdiction in such cas

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