IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR SA No. 3154 of 2025 (ASHOK LALWANI Vs STATE BANK OF INDIA )

Dated : 08-12-2025 Shri Ashok Lalwani - Senior Advocate with Shri Yashraj Patel -

Advocate for the appellant.

The case is listed awaiting receipt of office report showing the reasons for raising objection qua valuation as well as payment of court fees vide scrutiny report dated 26.11.2025.

The Filing Section has placed the report through the Deputy Registrar (J-I) which has been taken on record and perused.

In support of raising objections in the scrutiny report, the office report has incorporated the order of case titled Ashok Lalwani vs Gurumukh passed in SA. 2841 of 2018 on 4 July, 2023 wherein the Hon’ble Court held as under:-

8. Since in this case possession was delivered to the appellant in execution of the decree passed by the trial Court and the appellant has quantified the amount of mesne profit in memo of appeal as mentioned in para No. 5(d), thus, the appellant is liable to pay the court fees accordingly.

9. Hence, office has rightly point out the default in this regard, which is liable to be sustained. Accordingly, IA No.

2940/2019 is hereby dismissed.

The office report has also mentioned the order of ‘Ashok Lalwani Vs.

State Bank of India in MP No. 5150 of 2018 Order dt. 10.11.2021 wherein the Hon’ble Court held as under:-

15. However, facts of the present case are different suit premises was already vacated prior to passing of decree of ejectment. The appellant defendant has not challenged the decree of ejectment but has only challenged the decree of mesne profits, therefore, in the light of the law laid down by this High Court in case of Deendayal (supra) wherein it is held that where the appellant resists his liability to pay mesne profits notwithstanding the main relief granted against him or disputes the quantum of mesne profits, court-fees is also payable on the amount of mesne profits in dispute is the view which is applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case as has been approved by the Division Bench of this Court, in case of Shivaji (supra) accordingly, it is held that where a decree of ejectment is challenged by the defendant in a suit along with award of past and future mesne profits then same court-fees will be payable as was paid by the plaintiff in the suit i.e. it will not include payment of any court-fees on the amount of quantified future mesne profits but if decree of ejectment is not challenged but only aspect of past or future mesne profits is challenged then court-fees will be payable as per the valuation of the past mesne profits and/or the future mesne profits till the date of ejectment or the date of filing of appeal which ever is earlier.

At this stage of the case, the learned senior counsel Shri Ashok Lalwani appeared and made his submissions in support of his contentions by placing reliance on the cases law titled "Shivaji vs. Deoji; 1973 MPLJ 434" & "Shyamcharan Raghubar Prasad Tiwari vs. Sheojee Bhai Jairam Chattri and Another; AIR 1971 Madhya Pradesh 120" as well as case law having citation "AIR 1977(4) Supreme Court Case 393 (Equivalent citation-1977 SCC Online SC 283).

In support of his contentions and in reply to office report placed before the undersigned, the Ld. Counsel submitted that in the case titled ‘Ashok Lalwani Vs. State Bank of India in MP No. 5150 of 2018, the tenant State Bank of India was required to pay court fee since the future mense profits was quantified whereas in the present second appeal, the same is yet to be crystallized.

As far as the reliance of the office upon the case titled Ashok Lalwani vs Gurumukh, SA. 2841 of 2018, Order dt. 4 July, 2023 is concerned, the Ld. Counsel submitted that the legal principles laid down in this case, has no relevance as of today.

At this stage of the case, it is apt to delineate the statutory mandate of provisions of Section 12 of Court Fee Act which are as follows:-

12. Decision of question as to valuation -

(i) Ever