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

1999 Supreme(MP) 397

A.K.MATHUR, DIPAK MISRA
MADAK CHAND JAIN – Appellant
Versus
FATMA BAI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
C.L.Kotecha, R.I.Jain

A. K. MATHUR, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a reference made by the learned single Judge on account of two conflicting decisions of the single Bench - one given by Justice Shiv Dayal (as he then was) in Kishanlal v. Rambharose 1976 Jab LJ (SN) 63 and another given by Justice Bachawat (as he then was) in Kevalchand Puranchand v. Suganchand, 1983 MPLJ 381, on the following question of law, which reads as under :"whether a separate valuation for the purposes of jurisdiction and Court-fees with regard to the ejectment from the encroached portion is necessary to be put when eviction is sought on the ground under Section 12 (1) of the Act ?"

( 2 ) THE present revision has been preferred under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the order dated 24-7-1998 passed by the 1st Civil Judge, Class II, Khandwa, in Civil Suit No. 45-A/98 rejecting the objection raised by the applicant/defendant regarding the Court-fees and jurisdiction of the Court for entertaining the suit without payment of Court-fees for eviction from the additional accommodation.

( 3 ) THE brief facts which are necessary for disposal of this reference are that the respondent/plaintiff instituted the instant civil suit against




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