Back
MANISH MATHUR
Ansar Nawaz Khan Mutawalli Waqf Bhullo Begum – Appellant
Versus
Adeel Ahmad – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Manish Mathur, J.)
Heard Mr. Mohammad Tariq Saeed, learned counsel for revisionist, Mr. Sunil Sharma and Mr. Ruved Kamal Kidwai, learned counsel for opposite party No. 2 and Mr. Syed Aftab Ahmad, learned counsel for opposite party No. 8.
2. In view of order being proposed to be passed, notices to opposite parties No. 1, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 stand dispensed with.
3. Learned counsel for opposite parties submit that since a question of law is involved, the revision may be decided without objections being filed by the answering opposite parties.
4. Revision under Section 83(9) of the Waqf Act 1995 has been filed against order dated 17.11.2022 passed in Case No. 38 of 2020 whereby revisionist-plaintiff has been directed to pay ad valorem Court fees on the relief sought in plaint.
5. Learned counsel for revisionist submits that the aforesaid case had been filed by revisionist seeking a relief of permanent injunction against the defendants and their agents from interfering in peaceful possession over suit property. Further relief for a decree of declaration for properties entered in Waqf deed dated 3.12.1924 as Waqf Properties were also sought. It is submitted that for the purposes
In suits for declaratory decrees with consequential relief, fixed court fees apply when no possession is sought, as per Section 7(iv)(a) of the Court Fees Act.
plaintiff filed the suit for declaration that the sale deeds were fabricated and therefore, were void. Considering the provisions of Tamil Nadu Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act, it was held that sui....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the correct payment of court fee in a suit must be determined in accordance with settled legal principles and the specific provisions of the C....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of following the prescribed procedure for determining the valuation of the Suit and the payment of court fees, as per the provisions....
A mandatory injunction sought in a suit for declaration is an independent claim requiring separate court fees, not merely consequential to the declaration.
The court clarified that a non-executant must pay ad valorem court fees for declaring a sale deed void, capped at Rs.1,50,000 under the Madhya Pradesh Amendment.
Relief of mandatory injunction needs to be valued separately and requires ad valorem court fees, as it is not necessarily consequential to a declaration.
In cases involving the declaration of a gift deed as null and void, Section 7(iv-A) of the Court Fees Act mandates the payment of ad-valorem court fees based on the market value of the property.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
