##PAGE1##

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 2852/2019

Shiv Narayan S/o Shri Mangeram

----Appellant

Versus

Purshottam S/o Late Shri Satyanarayan & Ors.

----Respondents

For Appellant(s) : Mr.Nitesh Pareek (through VC) for

Mr.Ajay Kumar Bajpai

For Respondent(s) :

JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

Order

30/01/2026

1. Matter comes up on an interim application No.1/2020

seeking waiver of defect No.2 as pointed out by the Office. The

Office has raised an objection that valuation of the appeal has not

been mentioned and the Court fees has not been deposited.

2. A detailed reply to the aforesaid has been submitted by the

appellant by way of filing the instant interim application.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the matter

pertains to issuance of the succession certificate under Section

372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (for short, “the Act of

1925”) and as per Section 47 of the Rajasthan Court-Fees and

Suit Valuation Act, 1961 (for short, “the Court-Fees Act”), the fees

would be payable in such like matter, when the succession

certificate is finally issued.

4. In support of his contention, he has placed reliance upon the

judgment/ order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court at

the Principal Seat, Jodhpur in the case of Harish Vs. Chandra

(Uploaded on 03/02/2026 at 02:43:08 PM)

(Downloaded on 17/02/2026 at 04:12:19 AM)

(2 of 3) [CMA-2852/2019]

Kumar & Ors. while deciding S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal

No.2113/2011 dated 05.08.2016.

5. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and

perused the material available on record.

6. Perusal of the judgment/ order passed by the Co-ordinate

Bench of this Court at the Principal Seat, Jodhpur in the case of

Harish (supra) clearly indicates that the objection raised by the

Office pertaining to insufficiency of the Court fees is required to be

decided at the time of final hearing of the appeal.

7. While admitting the appeal, the objection raised by the Office

pertaining to the sufficiency of the court-fee was directed to be

decided at the time of final hearing.

8. In view of the fact that the appellant had paid a court-fees of

Rs.2/- at the time of filing the application and there is no contest

to the said application, since as per the provisions of Section 47 of

the Court-Fees Act, the same fees as payable in the Trial Court is

applicable and therefore, the fees paid by the appellant is

sufficient, however, while granting the succession certificate, the

appellant would be required to pay Court-fees in terms of Article 6

of Schedule (I) of the Court Fees Act, which is 3% of the value of

the estate.

9. Keeping in view the proposition of law, as propounded by the

Co-ordinate Bench of this Court at the Principal Seat, Jodhpur in

the case of Harish (supra), the defect pointed out by the Office is

dispensed with for the time being, till final disposal of the appeal

and the same would be decided at the time of final arguments.

(Uploaded on 03/02/2026 at 02:43:08 PM)

(Downloaded on 17/02/2026 at 04:12:19 AM)

(3 of 3) [CMA-2852/2019]

10. With the aforesaid observations, the application stands

disposed of.

11. Issue notice of appeal as well as the application under

Section 5 of the Limitation Act to the respondents. Rule is made

returnable by four weeks.

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

Aayush Sharma/22

(Uploaded on 03/02/2026 at 02:43:08 PM)

(Downloaded on 17/02/2026 at 04:12:19 AM)