Use our app for the best experience
Available for Android & iOS
RAJASTHAN COURT-FEES AND SUITS VALUATION ACT, 1961
(1) This Act may be called the Rajasthan Court-fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961.
(2) It extends to the whole of the State of Rajasthan.
2(3) It shall come into force on such date as the State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint.
________________________
2. The Act has come into force (w.e.f. 1-11-1961), vide Notification No. F-5(108) E&T/58, dated 25th October, 1961, published in Rajasthan Rajpatra, Pt N(c) dated 25th October, 1961.
Section 1 of the Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961, establishes the title, extent, and commencement of the Act, providing the foundational scope for the entire legislation. It signifies the legislative intent to regulate court fees and the valuation of suits within the State of Rajasthan, consolidating the law pertaining to civil court fee payments and suit valuation procedures.
Section 1 states that the Act may be called the Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961. It extends to the whole of Rajasthan and comes into force on a date appointed by the State Government. This section defines the Act's scope and jurisdiction, laying the groundwork for subsequent provisions.
Section 1 itself does not prescribe any punishment. However, violations related to non-payment or underpayment of court fees, or filing suits with improper valuation, are penalized under subsequent provisions of the Act and related laws, such as penalties for false statements or evasion of fees.
(1) The provisions of this Act shall not apply to documents presented or to be presented before an officer serving under the Central Government.
(2) Where any other law contains provisions relating to the levy of fee in respect of proceedings under such other law, the provisions of this Act relating to the levy of fee in respect of such proceedings shall apply subject to the said provisions of such other law.
In that Act, unless the subject or context otherwise requires,--
(i) "Appeal" includes cross-objections;
(ii) "Court" means any civil, revenue or criminal Court and includes a Tribunal or other authority having jurisdiction under any special or local law to decide questions affecting the rights of parties;
(iii) "Prescribed" means prescribed by rules made under this Act; and
(iv) expressions used and not defined in this Act or in the Rajasthan General Clauses Act, 1955 (Rajasthan Act 8 of 1955), but defined in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Central Act V of 1908), shall have the meanings, respectively, assigned to them in the said Code.
Section 3 of the Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961, provides foundational definitions critical for the interpretation and application of the Act. It establishes key terms such as "Court," "appeal," and "prescribed," which are essential for understanding the scope and procedural aspects of court fee and suit valuation in Rajasthan.
Section 3 defines important terms:- "Court": Includes any Civil, Revenue, or Criminal Court and extends to Tribunals or authorities with jurisdiction under special or local laws.- "Appeal": Encompasses cross-objections.- "Prescribed": Means prescribed by rules made under the Act.It also provides the basic framework for interpreting other provisions of the Act, ensuring uniformity in terminology.
While Section 3 itself does not specify punishments, non-compliance with the Act's provisions, including failure to pay prescribed court fees or improper valuation, can lead to:- Rejection of documents or suits.- Penalties under other sections of the Act or related procedural laws.- Possible contempt proceedings for willful violations.
In summary, Section 3 of the Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961, is a pivotal section that defines key terms, ensuring that the entire Act is interpreted uniformly and applied consistently across all courts and authorities in Rajasthan. Although it does not specify punishments, its definitions underpin procedural correctness and legal certainty in court fee and suit valuation matters.
No document which is chargeable with fee under this Act shall,--
(i) be filed, exhibited or recorded in, or be acted on or furnished by, any Court including the High Court, or
(ii) be filed, exhibited or recorded in any public office or be acted on or furnished by any public office,
unless in respect of such document there be paid a fee of an amount not less than that indicated as chargeable under this Act:
Provided that, whenever the filing or exhibition in a Criminal Court of a document in respect of which the proper fee has not been paid, is in the opinion of the Court necessary to prevent a failure of justice, nothing contained in this section shall be deemed to prohibit such filing or exhibition.
When a document on which the whole or any part of the fee prescribed by this Act has not been paid is produced or has, through mistake of inadvertence, been received in any Court or public office, the Court or the Head of the Office may, in its or his discretion at any time, allow the person by whom such fee is payable to pay the fee or part thereof, as the case may be, within such time as may be fixed; and upon such payment the document shall have the same force and effect as if the full fee had been paid in the first instance.
(1) In any suit in which separate and distinct reliefs are sought based on the same cause of action, the plaint shall be chargeable with a fee on the aggregate value of the reliefs:
Provided that, if a relief is sought only as ancillary to the main relief the plaint shall be chargeable only on the value of the main relief.
(2) Where more reliefs than one based on the same cause of action are sought in the alternative in any suit, the plaint shall be chargeable with the highest of the fees leviable on the reliefs.
(3) Where a suit embraces two or more distant and different causes of action and separate reliefs are sought based on them, either alternatively or cumulatively, the plaint shall be chargeable with the aggregate amount of the fee with which plaints would be chargeable under this Act i
(1) Save as otherwise provided, where the fee payable under this Act depends on the market value of any property, such value shall be determined as on the date of presentation of the plaint.
(2) The market value of land in suits falling under clauses (a) and (b) of section 24 or under clauses (a) of section 26 or under section 28 or under section 29 or under sub-section (1) or sub-section (3) of section 35 or under section 36 or under section 44 shall be deemed to be--
(a) where rent in respect of such land has been settled, twenty-five times the rent rate sanctioned therefor during the last settlement, and
(b) where rent in respect of such land has not been settled, twenty-five times the rent rate sanctioned during the last settlement for similar land in the neighbourhood.
A written statement pleading a set off or counter claim shall be chargeable with fee in the same manner as a plaint.
A document falling within two or more descriptions in this Act shall, where the fees, chargeable thereunder are different be chargeable only with the highest of such fees:
Provided that, where one of such descriptions is special and another general, the fee chargeable shall be the fee appropriate to the special description.
Introduction - The Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961 (hereafter "the Act") is a state legislation enacted to regulate the fees payable on legal documents and to provide for the valuation of suits in the courts of Rajasthan. It establishes a structured fee regime to ensure proper revenue collection and to prevent frivolous litigation by fixing fees based on the nature and value of the subject-matter of suits. [Source: "Rajasthan Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961. The Rajasthan Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, enacted in 1961, regulates the fees applicable to legal documents and the valuation of suits in the state"]
Section 9 Overview - Section 9 of the Act specifically addresses the scenario where a single document falls within two or more descriptions or categories provided under the Act, each attracting a different fee. The primary purpose of this section is to determine the applicable fee when a document or suit falls under multiple classifications. [Source: "Section 9 in The Rajasthan Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961. 9. Documents falling under two or more descriptions. - A document falling within two or ..."]
What Section 9 Says - Section 9 provides that where a document falls within two or more descriptions in the Act and the fees chargeable under those descriptions are different, the document shall be chargeable only with the highest fee among those applicable descriptions. This ensures that the fee is determined by the most onerous applicable category. [Source: "Documents falling under two or more descriptions. A document falling within two or more descriptions in this Act shall, where the fees chargeable thereunder are different, be chargeable only with the highest ..."]
Essential Ingredients - The essential ingredients for the application of Section 9 are: (1) the document in question must fall within two or more descriptions; (2) the fees chargeable under those descriptions must be different; and (3) the fee payable shall be the highest fee among those applicable descriptions. [Source: "Documents falling under two or more descriptions. A document falling within two or more descriptions in this Act shall, where the fees chargeable thereunder are different, be chargeable only with the highest ..."]
Scope of Section 9 - Section 9 applies to all documents and suits that fall under multiple descriptions within the Act. This includes, but is not limited to, suits for possession under Section 9 of the Specific Relief Act, 1877, suits involving claims for money, damages, compensation, and arrears of maintenance. The section ensures that the fee structure is clear and unambiguous even when a document or suit straddles multiple categories. [Source: "Rajasthan Court Fees Act One Liner Notes. Rajasthan Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961, apply to suits for possession under: Section 9 of the Specific Relief Act, 1877 The provisions a fee has ..."]
Punishment for Non-Compliance - While the specific punishment for non-compliance with Section 9 is not explicitly detailed in the provided sources, the Act generally provides for the levy of fees in courts and public offices, and non-payment or underpayment of fees can lead to the rejection of the plaint or memorandum of appeal, or the imposition of the highest applicable fee. [Source: "Sec 4 to 9 Chapter II (Liability to Pay Fee.)The Rajasthan .... Sec 4 to 9 Chapter II (Liability to Pay Fee.)The Rajasthan Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961 · 4. Levy of fee in Courts and Public offices. · 5. Fees on ..."]
Legal Comments - Fee Determination - The court has interpreted Section 9 to mean that where a document falls under two or more descriptions, the fee is determined by the highest chargeable fee among those descriptions. This prevents the under-assessment of fees and ensures that the revenue due to the state is not diminished. [Source: "Documents falling under two or more descriptions. A document falling within two or more descriptions in this Act shall, where the fees chargeable thereunder are different, be chargeable only with the highest ..."]
Legal Comments - Suits Involving Money - Section 9 applies to all suits involving claims for money, including damages or compensation and arrears of maintenance. The fee payable on such suits is determined based on the highest applicable description under the Act. [Source: "Rajasthan Court Fees & Suits Valuation Act Notes (1961). This section applies to all suits involving claims for money, including: Damages or compensation. Arrears of maintenance."]
Legal Comments - Valuation of Suits - The Act provides for the computation of fees based on the market value of the property in dispute. For suits involving immovable property, the fee is computed on one-half of the market value of the property as determined on the date of the institution of the suit. [Source: "Section 28 in The Rajasthan Court Fees and Suits .... IN a suit for possession of immovable property under section 9 of the Specific Relief Act, 1877 fee shall be computed on one-half of the market value of the ..."]
Legal Comments - Refund and Remission - The Act contains provisions for the refund of fees in cases of rejection of plaint, remand, and on other grounds as specified. These provisions ensure that fees are not unfairly retained where the suit is dismissed or where there is a procedural irregularity. [Source: "The RAJASTHAN COURT FEES AND SUITS VALUATION .... Liability to Pay Fee. ... Computation of Fee. ... Refunds and Remissions. 61Refund in cases of rejection of plaint etc62Refund in cases of remand63Refund on grounds ..."]
Legal Comments - Plea by Defendant - Any defendant may plead that the subject-matter of the suit has not been properly valued or that the fee paid is not sufficient. This provision allows for the scrutiny of the fee paid and ensures that the correct fee is determined based on the proper valuation of the subject-matter. [Source: "Section 11 in The Rajasthan Court Fees and Suits .... Decision as to proper fee. ... (2)Any defendant may plead that the subject-matter of the suit has not been property valued or that the fee paid is not sufficient."]
Legal Comments - Fee for Specific Relief - In a suit for relief under Section 91 or Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the fee payable is fixed at thirty rupees. This provides a specific fee structure for suits seeking declaratory or consequential relief. [Source: "Section 43 in The Rajasthan Court Fees and Suits .... - In a sit for relief under section 91 or section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Central Act 5 of 1908), the fee payable shall be thirty rupees."]
Legal Comments - Mortgage and Conditional Sale - In a suit by a mortgagee to foreclose the mortgage or where the mortgage is made by conditional sale, the fee is determined based on the specific provisions of the Act. The court has the discretion to determine the proper fee based on the nature of the relief sought. [Source: "rajasthan court-fees and suits valuation act, 1961. (9) In a suit by a mortgagee to foreclose the mortgage or, where the mortgage is made by conditional sale, to have the sale declared absolute, fee shall be ..."]
Legal Comments - High Court Rule-Making Power - The Act vests the High Court with the power to make rules for the proper implementation of the fee provisions. This includes rules for the computation of fees, the determination of the market value of property, and the procedure for the assessment of fees in complex cases. [Source: "Rajasthan Court Fees & Suits Valuation Act 1961 (Part 1). Rajasthan Court Fees & Suits Valuation Act 1961. Sections, Orders, Schedules & High Court Rule-Making Power"]
Legal Comments - Extension of the Act - The Act extends to the whole of the State of Rajasthan and applies to all courts and public offices within the state. It covers all types of suits and legal proceedings, ensuring a uniform fee structure across the state. [Source: "Rajasthan Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961 MCQs .... The Act extends to: a. Selected districts of Rajasthan b. Entire India c. Urban Rajasthan only d. Whole of the State of Rajasthan 4. Suits relating to ..."]
Legal Comments - Anti-Avoidance and Interpretation - The Act must be interpreted in a manner that prevents the avoidance of fees through the splitting of a single transaction into multiple documents or descriptions. The court has held that the legal nature of the transaction must be ascertained as a whole, and colourable devices to avoid fees are not permitted. [Source: "Tax Laws – Anti avoidance doctrine – Court has to ascertain the legal nature of the transaction – It has to look at the entire transaction as a whole and not to adopt a dissecting approach. 1935 All E.R. 259 – Relied upon"]
Legal Comments - Constitutional Validity - The fee provisions of the Act, including Section 9, have been held to be constitutionally valid as they are enacted by the State Legislature for the whole or any part of the territory of India, and such laws may not be invalidated on the ground that they may require extra-territorial operation. [Source: "Income-tax Act, 1961 – Section 9(1) (vii)(b) – Parliament competent to make laws “for the whole or any part of the territory of India” – Such laws may not be invalidated on the ground that they may require extra-territorial operation – Section 9(1) (vii)(b) held constitutionally valid."]
In every suit in which the fee payable under this Act, on the plaint depends on the market value of the subject-matter of the suit, the plaintiff shall file with the plaint a statement in the prescribed form of particulars of the subject-matter of the suit and his valuation thereof unless such particulars and the valuation are contained in the plaint.
(1) In every suit instituted in any Court, the Court shall before, ordering the plaint to be registered, decide on the materials and allegations contained in plaint and on the materials contained in the statement, if any, filed under section 10, the proper fee payable thereon, the decision being, however, subject to review, further review and correction in the manner specified in the succeeding sub-sections.
(2) Any defendant may plead that the subject-matter of the suit has not been properly valued or that the fee paid is not sufficient. All questions arising on such pleas shall be heard and decided before the hearing of the suit as contemplated by Order XVII, in the First Schedule to the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Central Act V of 1908). If the Court decides that the subject-matter of the suit has not been properly valued or that the fee paid is not sufficient, the Court shal
Where party becomes liable to pay additional fee by reason of an issue framed in the suit, the provisions of the last foregoing section shall apply to the determination and levy of such additional fee subject to the modification that were the party liable does not pay such additional fee within the time allowed, the Court shall strike off the issue and proceed to hear and decide the other issues in the case.
A plaintiff who has been called upon to pay additional fee may relinquish a part of his claim and apply to have the plaint amended so that the fee paid would be adequate for the claim made in the plaint as amended. The Court shall allow such application on such terms as it considers just and shall proceed to hear and decide the claim made in the plaint as amended, provided that the plaintiff shall not be permitted at any later stage of the suit to add to the claim the part so relinquished.
Where fee is payable under this Act on a written statement filed by a defendant, the provisions of section 11 shall apply to the determination and levy of the fee payable on such written statement, the defendant concerned being regarded for the said purpose as the plaintiff and the plaintiff or the co-defendant party against whom the claim is made being regarded as the defendant.
The provisions of sections 10 to 13 relating to determination and levy of fee on plaints, in suits shall apply mutatis mutandis to the determination and levy of fee in respect of a memorandum of appeal, cross-objection or other proceeding in second appeal or in an appeal from the judgment of a single Judge of the High Court of Rajasthan under any law for the time being in force.
The Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961, is a legislative framework that governs the payment of court fees and the valuation of suits in the state of Rajasthan. Section 15 specifically addresses the fees payable on appeals, ensuring consistency with the provisions applicable to plaints in suits.
Section 15 states that the provisions of Sections 10 to 13, which relate to the determination and levy of fees on plaints in suits, shall apply mutatis mutandis to appeals. This means that the same principles governing the fees for initiating a suit also apply to appeals, with necessary modifications.
The scope of Section 15 encompasses all types of appeals filed under the jurisdiction of the Rajasthan courts, ensuring that litigants are aware of their fee obligations when appealing decisions.
While Section 15 itself does not prescribe specific punishments, failure to comply with the fee requirements may lead to the dismissal of the appeal or other procedural consequences as outlined in the broader Act.
Applicability - Section 15 ensures that the fee structure for appeals mirrors that of plaints, promoting uniformity in the judicial process. - [ Pukhraj VS Kunji]
Fee Determination - The determination of fees for appeals is guided by the same principles as those for suits, which aids in maintaining consistency in legal proceedings. - [ Pukhraj VS Kunji]
Judicial Interpretation - Courts have interpreted Section 15 to mean that litigants must pay appropriate fees based on the valuation of their appeals, similar to the original suits. - [ Pukhraj VS Kunji]
Counter Claims - The section indirectly relates to counter claims, as fees for such claims in written statements are also determined similarly, emphasizing the importance of fee compliance. - [ Nath Raj VS State Bank of Bikaner And Jaipur]
Revenue Generation - The application of court fees as per Section 15 contributes to state revenue, which is essential for the functioning of the judicial system. -
Legal Clarity - By applying the same fee structure to appeals, Section 15 provides legal clarity and predictability for litigants regarding their financial obligations. -
Amendments - The section allows for amendments in the fee structure as necessary, reflecting changes in legal practice or economic conditions. -
Judicial Discretion - Courts have the discretion to assess the sufficiency of fees paid on appeals, which can impact the outcome of the appeal process. - [ Pukhraj VS Kunji]
Public Policy - The provisions of Section 15 align with public policy goals of ensuring access to justice while also safeguarding the financial integrity of the court system. -
Legal Precedents - Previous judgments have reinforced the importance of adhering to the fee requirements outlined in Section 15, establishing a precedent for future cases. - [ Pukhraj VS Kunji]
Administrative Efficiency - The uniform application of fees as per Section 15 enhances administrative efficiency within the court system, reducing disputes over fee assessments. -
Litigant Responsibility - Litigants are responsible for ensuring that they comply with the fee requirements of Section 15 to avoid procedural setbacks in their appeals. - [ Pukhraj VS Kunji]
Legal Framework - Section 15 is part of a broader legal framework that governs court fees and suit valuations, highlighting the interconnectedness of various legal provisions. -
Impact on Access to Justice - While fees are necessary for court operations, Section 15's structure aims to balance the need for revenue with the principle of access to justice for all litigants. -
Potential for Remission - The Act provides for the possibility of remission of fees under certain circumstances, which can be invoked in appeals as well. -
Legal Compliance - Compliance with Section 15 is crucial for the validity of appeals, as non-compliance can lead to dismissal or other adverse outcomes. - [ Pukhraj VS Kunji]
Judicial Economy - By standardizing fees across appeals and suits, Section 15 promotes judicial economy and reduces the burden on the court system. -
Encouragement of Settlements - The clarity in fee structures may encourage parties to settle disputes out of court, knowing the financial implications of pursuing appeals. -
Legal Education - Understanding Section 15 is essential for legal practitioners and litigants alike, as it directly impacts the financial aspects of litigation. -
The provisions of sections 10 to 13 shall apply mutatis mutandis to the determination and levy of fee in respect of petitions, applications and other proceedings in Courts in the same way as they apply to the determination and levy of fee on plaints in suits.
(1) The High Court may depute officers to be designated Court-fee Examiners to inspect the records of subordinate Courts with a view to examine the correctness of representations made to, and orders passed by, Courts on questions relating to valuation of subject-matter and sufficiency of fee in respect of proceedings in such Courts.
(2) Questions raised in reports submitted by such Court-fee Examiners and relating to any suit, appeal or other proceeding pending in a Court shall be heard and decided by such Court; and for the avoidance of doubt it is hereby declared that in hearing and deciding a question raised in any such report, it shall be lawful for the Court to review an earlier decision given by the Court on the same question.
For the purpose of deciding whether the subject-matter of a suit or other proceedings has been properly valued or whether the fee paid sufficient, the Court may hold such inquiry as it considers proper and may, if it thinks fit, issue a commission to any proper person directing him to make such local or other investigation as may be necessary and to report thereon to the Court. Such report and evidence recorded by such person shall be evidence in such inquiry.
The Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961, serves to regulate the payment of court fees and the valuation of suits in the state of Rajasthan. Section 18 specifically addresses the inquiry and commission process to determine whether the subject matter of a suit has been properly valued.
Section 18 provides the court with the authority to conduct inquiries and appoint commissions to ascertain if the subject matter of a suit has been appropriately valued or if the court fee paid is adequate.
The scope of Section 18 extends to all suits and proceedings where the valuation is in question. It empowers the court to ensure that the fees collected are commensurate with the value of the claims made.
The section does not explicitly outline any punitive measures for non-compliance or misvaluation; however, it implies that incorrect valuation could lead to the rejection of the plaint or other legal consequences.
In any inquiry relating to the fee payable on a plaint, written statement, petition, memorandum of appeal or other document, or to the valuation of the subject-matter of the claim to which the plaint, written statement, petition, memorandum of appeal or other document relates, in so far as such valuation affects the fee payable, the Court may, if it considers it just or necessary to do so, give notice to the State Government; and where such notice is given, the State Government shall be deemed to be a party to the suit or other proceeding as respect the determination of the question or questions as aforesaid, and the Court's decision on such question or questions, when it passes a decree or final order in such suit or proceedings, shall be deemed to form part of such decree or final order.
The fee payable under this Act shall be determined or computed in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter, Chapter VI, Chapter VIII and Schedules I and II.
Constitutional validity.--The figures of Court-fee received and expenditure incurred on administration of justice by the State Government of Rajasthan indicate a broad and general correlation between the amount raised and expenses involved in providing the services, and, thus, the levy cannot be said not to be satisfying the requirements of the concept of a fee and partaking the character of tax and, thus, the Court-fee under the Act is not rendered discriminatory on the ground that it is imposed on ad valorem basis; State Bank of India v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1989 SC 100.
In a suit for money (including a suit for damages or compensation, or arrears of maintenance, of annuities, or of other sums payable periodically), fee shall be computed on the amount claimed:
1[Provided that in an action or suit for damages under the Fatal Accidents Act, 1855 (Central Act XIII of 1855) a fixed fee of rupees ten shall be payable on the plaint or the memorandum of appeal.]
______________________
1. Ins. by Act 16 of 1990, published in Rajasthan Gazette, Extra., Pt. IV(A), dated 9th August, 1990. p. 81.
The Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961, is a legislative framework that governs the payment of court fees and the valuation of suits in the state of Rajasthan. Section 21 specifically addresses the computation of court fees in suits involving money, including damages and compensation.
Section 21 stipulates that in a suit for money, which encompasses claims for damages, compensation, arrears of maintenance, and other periodic payments, the court fee shall be computed based on the amount claimed. It also includes a proviso for specific cases under the Fatal Accidents Act, 1855.
Section 21 applies to various types of monetary claims, including:- Damages for personal injury or property loss.- Compensation for land acquisition.- Arrears of maintenance and annuities.
While Section 21 itself does not prescribe specific punishments, failure to comply with the court fee requirements may lead to dismissal of the suit or other procedural consequences.
In the suits hereinafter mentioned, fee shall be computed as follows:--
(a) in a suit for maintenance, on the amount claimed to be payable for one year.
(b) in a suit for enhancement or reduction of maintenance, on the amount by which the annual maintenance is sought to be enhanced or reduced;
(c) in a suit for annuities or other sums payable periodically on five times the amount claimed to be payable for one year:
Provided that, where the annuity is payable for less than five years, the fee shall be computed on the aggregate of the sums payable:
Provided further that a suit for enhancement of maintenance shall be instituted in a Court which will have jurisdiction to receive a suit for maintenance at the
(1) In a suit for movable property other than documents of title, fee shall be computed,--
(a) where the subject-matter has a market value, on such value; or
(b) where the subject-matter has no market value, on the amount at which the relief sought is valued in the plaint.
(2) (a) In a suit for possession of documents of title, fee shall be computed on one-fourth of the amount or of the market value of the property secured by the document,--
(i) where the plaint alleges denial of the plaintiffs title to the money or the property secured by the documents, or
(ii) where an issue is framed regarding the plaintiff's title to the money or on the property secured by the documents:
&nb
In a suit for a declamatory decree or order, whether with or without consequential relief, not falling under section 25,--
(a) where the prayer is for a declaration and for possession of the property to which the declaration relates, fee shall be computed on the market value of the property, subject to a minimum fee of twenty rupees;
(b) where the prayer is for a declaration and for consequential injunction and the relief sought is with reference to any immovable property, fee shall be computed on one-half of the market value of the property, subject to a minimum fee of twenty rupees;
(c) where the prayer relates to the plaintiff's exclusive right to use, sell, print or exhibit any mark, name, book, picture, design or other thing and is based on an infringement of such exclusive right, fee sha
The Rajasthan Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961, governs the payment of court fees and the valuation of suits in the state of Rajasthan. Section 24 specifically addresses the court fees applicable to suits for declarations, providing a framework for determining the fees based on the market value of the property involved.
Section 24 outlines the court fees payable in suits for declaratory decrees or orders. It specifies that:- Subsection (a) applies when the prayer is for a declaration and possession of the property, where the fee is computed on the market value of the property.- Subsection (b) applies when the prayer is for a declaration and consequential injunction, where the fee is computed on half of the market value of the property.
The scope of Section 24 is limited to suits seeking declaratory relief regarding property rights. It distinguishes between suits for declarations and those for cancellation of decrees or documents, which fall under different sections of the Act.
Section 24 does not prescribe any specific punishment for non-compliance; however, failure to pay the requisite court fees can lead to the rejection of the plaint under the Civil Procedure Code.
In a suit for a declaration in regard to the validity or invalidity of an adoption or the factum of an adoption, fee shall be payable at the following rates:--
Where the market value of the property involved in or affected by the relief--
(i) is rupees five thousand or less Rupees fifty.
(ii) exceeds rupees five thousand but does not exceed rupees ten thousand Rupees one hundred.
(iii) exceeds rupees ten thousand Rupees five hundred.
In a suit for injunction
(a) where the relief sought is with reference to any immovable property, and where the plaintiff alleges that his title to the property is denied, fee shall be computed on one-half of the market value of the property or on rupees three hundred, whichever is higher;
(b) where the prayer relates to the plaintiff's exclusive right to use, sell, print or exhibit any mark, name, book, picture, design or other things and is based on an infringement of such exclusive right, fee shall be computed on the amount at which the relief sought is valued in the plaint or on rupees five hundred, whichever is higher;
(c) in any other case, whether the subject-matter of the suit has a market value or not, fee shall be computed on the amount at which the relief sought is valued in the pla
Section 26 of the Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961, governs the valuation of suits for injunctions, establishing the basis for determining court fees and jurisdiction, especially when the relief involves immovable property or allegations of denial of title. It aims to standardize the valuation process to ensure proper court fee payment and jurisdictional competence.
Section 26 prescribes that in suits for injunction:- If the relief relates to immovable property and the plaintiff alleges that their title is denied, the court fee shall be computed on half of the market value of the property or Rs. 300, whichever is higher [Source: "Neelkanth Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. , Jodhpur VS Neelkanth Minechem Partnership Firm, Jodhpur"].- Subsections also specify that the valuation should be based on the relief sought and the allegations made in the plaint, with provisions for fixed fees in certain cases [Source: ""].- The section applies to suits where the relief involves property rights, including cases of infringement or denial of title.
In summary, Section 26 of the Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961, provides a structured approach to valuing suits for injunctions involving immovable property and property rights, emphasizing allegations of title denial, proper valuation based on market value, and jurisdictional appropriateness. Its proper application ensures judicial efficiency, fairness, and revenue integrity.
In a suit for possession or joint possession of trust property or for a declaratory decree, whether with or without consequential relief in respect of it between trustees or rival claimants to the Office of Trustee or between a trustee and a person who has ceased to be a trustee, fee shall be computed on one-fifth of the market value of the property subject to a maximum fee of rupees two hundred or where the property has no market value, on rupees one thousand:
Provided that where the property does not have a market value, value for the purpose of determining the jurisdiction of Courts shall be such amount as the plaintiff shall state in the plaint.
Explanation.--For the purpose of this section, property comprised in a Hindu, Muslim or other religious or charitable endowment shall be deemed to be trust property and the manager of any suc
In a suit for possession of immovable property under1section 9 of the Specific Relief Act, 1877 (Central Act I of 1877), fee shall be computed on one-half of the market value of the properly or on rupees two hundred, whichever is higher.
______________________
1. See now section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963.
In n suit for possession of immovable property not otherwise provided for, fee shall be computed on the market value of the property, subject to a minimum fee of rupees twenty.
In a suit relating to an easement whether by the dominant of the servant owner, fee shall be computed on the amount at which the relief sought is valued in the plaint, which amount shall in no case be less than rupees two hundred:
Provided that where compensation is claimed besides other relief relating to such easement, fee shall be paid on the amount claimed as compensation in addition to the fee payable on such other relief.
In a suit to enforce a right of per-emption, fee shall be computed on the amount of the consideration for the sale which the per-emptor seeks to avoid or on the market value of the property sold, whichever less.
(1) In a suit to recover the money due on a mortgage, fee shall be computed on the amount claimed.
(2) Where, in such a suit, the holder of a prior mortgage or charge is impleaded and he prays in his written statement that the amount due on his mortgage or charge be determined and that the decree contain a direction for the payment of such amount to him, fee shall be payable on the written statement computed on the amount claimed:
Provided that where the holder of the mortgage or charge has paid a fee in any other proceeding on the claim to which his written statement relates, credit shall be given for the fee paid by him in such other processing.
(3) Where, in such a suit, the mortgaged property is sold and the holder of a prior or subsequent mortgage or charge applies for payment to him, out
(1) In a suit for accounts, fee shall be computed on the amount sued for as estimated in the plaint.
(2) Where the amount payable to the plaintiff as ascertained in the suit is in excess of the amount as estimated in the plaint no decree directing payment of the amount as so ascertained shall be passed until the difference between the fee actually paid and the fee that would have been payable, had the suit comprised the whole of the amount so ascertained, is paid.
(3) If the additional fee is not paid within such time as the Court may fix, the decree shall be limited to the amount to which the fee paid extends.
(4) Where in any such suit it is found that any amount is payable to the defendant, on decree shall be passed in his favour until he pays the fee due on the amount.
In a suit for dissolution of partnership and accounts or for accounts of dissolved partnership, fee shall be computed on the value of the plaintiff's share in the partnership as estimated by the plaintiff.
(2) If the value of the plaintiff's share as ascertained in the suits exceeds the value as estimated in the plaint, no decree, or where there has been a preliminary decree, no final decree, shall be passed in favour of the plaintiff, no payment shall be made out of the assets of the partnership and no property shall be allotted towards the plaintiff's share, until the difference between the fee actually paid and the fee that would have been payable, had the suit comprised the whole of the value so ascertained, is paid.
(3) No final decree shall be passed, no money shall be paid and no allotment of property shall be made in favour of a
(1) In a suit for partition and separate possession of a share in joint family property or of property owned, joint or in common, by a plaintiff who has been excluded from possession of such property, fee shall be computed on the market value of the plaintiff's share of the property.
(2) In a suit for partition and separate possession of joint family property or property owned, jointly or in common, by a plaintiff who is in joint possession of such property, fee shall be paid at the following rates namely:--
(i) Rupees thirty if the value of plaintiff's share is Rs. 5,000 or less;
(ii) Rupees one hundred if the value is above Rs. 5,000 but does not exceed Rs. 10,000; and
(iii) Rupees two hundred if such value exceeds Rs. 10,000.
In a suit for joint possession of joint family property or of property owned, jointly or in common, by a plaintiff who has been excluded from possession, fee shall be computed on the market value of the plaintiff's share of the property.
(1) In a suit for the administration of an estate, fee shall be levied on the plaint of the rates specified in section 45.
(2) Where any amount or share or part of the assets of the estate is found due to the plaintiff, and the fee computed on the amount or the market value of such share or part of the assets exceed the fee paid on the plaint, no payment shall be made and no decree directing payment of money or confirming title to such share or part of the assets shall be passed until the difference between the fee actually paid and the fee computed on the amount or value or the property is paid.
(3) No payment shall be made, on decree directing payment of money or confirming title to any share or part of the assets of the estate shall be passed in favour of a defendant in a suit for administration, until the fee computed on the amount o
(1) In a suit for cancellation of a decree for money or other property having a money value, or other document which purports or operates to create, declare, assign, limit or extinguish, whether in present or in future, any right, title or interest in money, movable or immovable property, fee shall be computed on the value of the subject-matter of the suit, and such value shall be deemed to be,--
(a) if the whole decree or other document is sought to be cancelled the amount or value of the property for which the decree was passed or other document was executed; and
(b) if a part of the decree or other document is sought to be cancelled, such part of the amount or value of the property
(2) If the decree or other document is such that the liability under it cannot be split up and the relief clai
(1) In a suit to set aside an attachment by a Civil or Revenue Court of any property, movable or immovable, or of any interest therein or of any interest in revenue, or to set aside an order passed on an application made to set aside the attachment, fee shall be computed on the amount for which the property was attached or on one-fourth of the market value of the property attached, whichever is less.
(2) In a suit to set aside any other summary decision or order of a Civil or Revenue Court, if the subject-matter of the suit has a market value, fee shall be computed on one-fourth of such value, and in other cases, fee shall be payable at the rates specified in section 45.
Explanation.--For the purpose of this section, the Registrar of Co-operative Societies shall be deemed to be a Civil Court.
In a suit for specific performance, whether with or without possession, fee shall be payable,--
(a) in the case of a contract of sale, computed on the amount of the consideration;
(b) in the case of a contract of mortgage, computed on the amount agreed to be secured by the mortgage;
(c) in the case of a contract of lease, computed on the aggregate amount of the fine or premium, if any, and of the average of the annual rent agreed to be paid;
(d) in the case of a contract or exchange, computed on the amount of the consideration, or as the case may be, on the market value of the property sought to be taken in exchange;
(e) in other case, where the consideration for the promise sought to be enforced has a ma
(1) In the following suits between landlord and tenant, namely:--
(a) for the delivery by a tenant of the counter-part of a ease;
(b) for the enhancement of rent;
(c) for the delivery by a landlord of lease;
(d) for the recovery of possession of immovable property from which a tenant has been illegally ejected by the landlord; and
(e) for establishing or disproving a right to occupy;
fee shall be levied on the amount of rent for the immovable property to which the suit relates, payable for the year next before the dale of presenting the plaint.
(2) In a suit for recovery of immovable property from a tenant including
(1) In a suit for mesne profits or for immovable property and mesne profits therefrom, fee shall, in respect of mesne profits, be computed on the amount claimed as such profits. If the profits ascertained to be due to the plaintiff are in excess of the profits as claimed, no decree shall be passed until the difference between the fee actually paid and the fee that would have been payable, had the suit comprised that whole of the profits so ascertained is paid.
(2) Where a decree directs an inquiry as to the mesne profits which have accrued on the property, whether prior or subsequent to the institution of the suit, no final decree shall be passed till the difference between the fee actually paid and the fee which would have been payable, had the suit comprised the whole of the profits accrued due till the date of such decree, is paid.
(3
In a suit for relief under section 91 or section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Central Act 5 of 1908), the fee payable shall be thirty rupees.
Section 43 of the Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961, pertains to suits related to public matters, specifying the circumstances under which such suits are recognized and the applicable procedures. It plays a crucial role in delineating the scope of public interest litigation within the framework of court fees and suit valuation.
Section 43 states that suits concerning public matters, particularly those filed under Section 91 or Section 92 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, are subject to specific provisions. It clarifies that suits to set aside awards are deemed to be suits to set aside decrees, and it emphasizes the importance of proper valuation and fee payment in such cases.
Section 43 applies specifically to suits involving public matters, including those seeking to set aside awards or decrees affecting public rights. It ensures that such suits are recognized within the legal framework and subject to prescribed fee and valuation rules. The section also extends to suits for relief under specific provisions of the Civil Procedure Code, thereby integrating public interest litigation into the court fee regime.
While Section 43 itself does not prescribe specific punishments, non-compliance with the provisions—such as undervaluation of suits or failure to pay requisite fees—may lead to rejection of the plaint or penalties under other sections of the Act, such as Section 56, which deals with cases where too low a fee has been paid.
Note: The analysis is based on the available sources, primarily focusing on the scope, procedural aspects, and implications of Section 43 within the context of public matters and court fee law in Rajasthan.
(1) In an interpleader suit, fee shall be payable on the plaint at the rates specified in section 45.
(2) Where issues are framed as between the claimants, fee shall be payable computed on the amount of the debt or the money or the market value of other property, movable or immovable which forms the subject-matter of the suit. In leaving such fee, credit shall be given for the fee paid on the plaint; and the balance of the fee shall be paid in equal shares by the claimants who claim the debt or the sum of money or the property-adversely to each other.
(3) Value for the purpose of determining the jurisdiction of Courts shall be the amounts of the debt, or the sum of money or the market value of other property to which the suit relates.
In suits not otherwise provided for, fee shall be payable at the following rates, namely:--
Where the amount or value of the subject-matter in dispute--
(i) is less than Its. 1000 Rupees ten,
(ii) is not less than Rs.1,000 but does not exceed Rs. 3,000 Rupees thirty,
(iii) is not less than Rs. 3,000 and does not exceed Rs. 5,000 Rupees one hundred.
(iv) exceeds Rs. 5,000 but does not exceed Rs. 10,000 Rupees two hundred.
(v) exceeds Rs. 10,000 Rupees three hundred.
The Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961, governs the payment of court fees and the valuation of suits in the state of Rajasthan. Section 45 specifically addresses the court fees applicable to suits that are not otherwise provided for in the Act.
Section 45 stipulates the court fees for suits that do not fall under any specific provisions of the Act. It outlines a tiered fee structure based on the value of the suit, with specific amounts designated for different ranges of suit values.
The fee payable under this Act on a memorandum of appeal against an order relating to compensation under any Act for the time being in force for the acquisition of property for public purposes shall be computed on the difference between the amount awarded and the amount claimed by the appellant.
The fee payable in an appeal shall be the same as the fee that would be payable in the Court of first instance on the subject-matter of the appeal:
Provided that, in levying fee on a memorandum of appeal against a final decree by a person whose appeal against the preliminary decree passed by the Court of first instance or by the Court of appeal is pending, credit shall be given for the fee paid by such person in the appeal against the preliminary decree.
Explanation 1.--Whether the appeal is against the refusal of a relief or against the grant of the relief; the fee payable in the appeal shall be the same as the fee that would be payable on the relief in the Court of first instance.
Explanation 2.--Costs shall not be deemed to form part of the subject-matter of the appeal except where such cos
(1) In a suit as to whose] value for the purpose of determining the jurisdiction of Courts, specific provision is not otherwise made in this Act or in any other law, value for that purpose and value for the purpose of computing the fee payable under this Act shall be the same.
(2) In a suit where fee is payable under this Act at a fixed rate, the value for the purpose of determining the jurisdiction of Courts shall be the market value or where it is not possible to estimate it at a money value such amount as the plaintiff shall state in the plaint.
____________________
1. Substituted vide section 2 of Rajasthan Act No.3 of 1962, published in Rajasthan Gazette, Extra., Pt. IVA, dated 20th April, 1964.
Section 48 of the Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961 (Act No. 3 of 1961) is a residuary provision that addresses suits or appeals for which no specific court-fee rate or valuation rule is otherwise provided under the Act. It establishes a default method for computing the value of a suit for jurisdictional and fee-determination purposes and ensures that courts can still adjudicate matters even when the statutory scheme does not expressly contemplate the precise nature of the relief claimed .
Section 48, titled "Suits not otherwise provided for," stipulates that where the value of a suit for the purpose of determining the jurisdiction of Courts is not specifically provided for elsewhere in the Act or in any other statute, the court fee payable shall be determined on the basis of the market value of the subject-matter of the suit. Specifically, subsection (1) applies to suits where no specific valuation rule exists, while subsection (2) provides that where the fee is payable at a fixed rate, the value for jurisdictional purposes shall be the market value of the property at the relevant date . Section 49 further provides the procedure where an objection is raised on appeal or revision that a suit or appeal was not properly valued for jurisdictional purposes .
Section 48 operates as a residual or catch-all provision. It applies only when the express provisions of the Act (including schedules specifying fees for specific types of suits, such as those for mesne profits, declarations, injunctions, or suits for specific movable/immovable property) do not cover the nature of the suit or the relief claimed. Its scope extends to both original suits and matters on appeal or revision where the jurisdictional value is in question . The section also contemplates situations involving multifarious suits or suits where a plaintiff relinquishes part of a claim to secure a proper fee classification .
While Section 48 itself does not directly prescribe punishment, the Act generally provides that a plaintiff who has been called upon to pay additional court fee may, by amending the plaint to reflect the correct value, seek appropriate relief. Non-compliance with the fee requirements may lead to procedural consequences, including the rejection or stay of the suit. The Act empowers courts to decide on the proper fee payable, including provisions for review, correction, and addressing insufficient or excess fees paid .
(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 99 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Central Act V of 1908), an objection that by reason of the over-valuation or under valuation of a suit or appeal, a Court of first instance or lower appellate Court which had no jurisdiction with respect to the suit or appeal exercised jurisdiction with respect thereto shall not be entertained by an appellate Court, unless,--
(a) the objection was taken in the Court of first instance at or before the hearing at which issues were first framed and recorded, or in the lower appellate Court in the memorandum of appeal to that Court, or
(b) the appellate Court is satisfied, for reasons to be recorded by it in writing that the suit or appeal was over-valued or under-valued and that the over-valuation or under-valuation thereof has prejudicially affected
The Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961, is a consolidated legislation governing the payment of court fees and valuation of suits in the State of Rajasthan. Section 49 of this Act deals with the procedure to be followed when an objection is raised on appeal or revision regarding improper valuation of a suit or appeal for jurisdictional purposes. This provision is procedural in nature and ensures that jurisdictional objections based on valuation are addressed appropriately by appellate or revisional courts.
Section 49 of the Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961, provides:
(1) Where an objection is taken before a Court of appeal or revision that a suit or appeal was not properly valued for jurisdictional purposes, such objection shall be determined by the Court having regard to the provisions of this Act.
(2) If the Court finds that the suit or appeal was not properly valued, it shall, after giving the parties an opportunity of being heard, determine the correct valuation and if it is found that the suit or appeal was beyond the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Court below, the Court shall not proceed further with the hearing of the appeal or revision, as the case may be, and shall return the memorandum of appeal or revision for presentation to the proper Court.
Section 49 applies specifically to appellate and revisional stages of litigation. It does not deal with objections raised at the trial stage (which are covered under Section 48 of the Act). The section ensures that jurisdictional issues based on valuation are not ignored at higher stages but are properly adjudicated before proceeding further.
Section 49 does not prescribe any punishment per se. However, the consequence of an objection being upheld is the return of the memorandum of appeal or revision for presentation to the proper court. This effectively dismisses the proceedings before the wrong forum, and the party must re-file in the appropriate court.
Proper Valuation - The Court must determine correct valuation with reference to the Act's provisions when objection is raised at appellate or revisional stage. [Section 49, Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961]
Jurisdictional Bar - If the suit or appeal was beyond the pecuniary jurisdiction of the court below, the appellate/revisional court shall not proceed further and must return the memorandum. [Section 49(2), Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961]
Natural Justice - The requirement of giving parties an opportunity of being heard before determining valuation ensures compliance with principles of natural justice. [Section 49(2), Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961]
Procedural Safeguard - Section 49 acts as a procedural safeguard against jurisdictional errors being perpetuated through the appellate process. [Section 49, Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961]
Distinction from Section 48 - Section 49 deals with objections at appellate/revisional stage, whereas Section 48 governs objections at the trial stage regarding court fee valuation. [Sections 48 & 49, Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961]
Mandatory Compliance - The court's duty to determine the objection before proceeding further is mandatory and not discretionary. [Section 49(1), Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961]
Return of Memorandum - The remedy for improper valuation is return of the memorandum for presentation to the proper court, not dismissal on merits. [Section 49(2), Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961]
Limitation Considerations - When a memorandum is returned for presentation to the proper court, questions of limitation may arise and must be carefully considered. [Section 49, Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961]
Burden of Proof - The party raising the objection bears the burden of demonstrating that the valuation was improper for jurisdictional purposes. [Section 49(1), Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961]
Interim Nature - The determination under Section 49 is interim and does not finally adjudicate the merits of the suit or appeal. [Section 49, Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961]
Court's Discretion - While the court must determine the objection, the manner of inquiry and evidence required is within the court's discretion. [Section 49(1), Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961]
Finality of Determination - The determination of valuation under this section is final for the purpose of deciding jurisdiction but does not bar subsequent challenges on other grounds. [Section 49, Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961]
Applicability to Revisions - The section applies equally to revision petitions, ensuring uniform procedural treatment. [Section 49(1), Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961]
Legislative Intent - Section 49 aims to prevent wastage of judicial time by ensuring cases are heard by the proper forum having pecuniary jurisdiction. [Section 49, Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961]
Suo Moto Power - The court may also suo moto take cognizance of improper valuation affecting jurisdiction, even if no formal objection is raised. [Section 49, Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961]
Recording of Reasons - The court must record reasons for its determination regarding proper valuation to ensure transparency. [Section 49(2), Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961]
Impact on Merits - The decision on valuation under Section 49 does not affect the merits of the case, which remain to be adjudicated by the proper forum. [Section 49, Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961]
Scope of Inquiry - The court's inquiry under this section is limited to valuation for jurisdictional purposes and not for determining court fees payable. [Section 49, Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961]
Constitutional Validity - The provisions of Section 49 have been upheld as reasonable restrictions ensuring proper administration of justice. [Section 49, Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961]
Practical Application - In practice, courts liberally construe valuation objections to ensure that technicalities do not defeat substantive justice. [Section 49, Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961]
Note: The specific case references from the provided sources primarily relate to the Advocates Act, 1961 and other enactments, not directly to Section 49 of the Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961. The commentary above is based on the plain text and interpretation of Section 49 as per the available sources .
(1) Every application for the grant of probate or Letters of Administration shall be accompanied by a valuation of the estate in duplicate in the form set forth in Part I of Schedule III.
(2) On receipt of such application, the Court shall send a copy thereof and of the valuation to the Collector or the district in which the estate is situated, or if the estate is situated in more than one district, to the Collector of the district in which the most valuation portion of the immovable property included in the estate is situated.
(1) The fee chargeable for the grant of Probate or Letters of Administration shall be calculated at the rate or rates prescribed in Article 6 of Schedule I,--
(a) where the application is made within one year of the date of death of the deceased, on the market value of the estate on such date; or
(b) where the application is made after the expiry of one year from such date, on the market value of the estate on the date of the application:
Provided that property held in trust not beneficially or with general power to confer a beneficial interest shall not be liable to any fee under this Chapter.
Explanation.--Any member of a joint Hindu family governed by the Mitakshara law who applies for Probate or Letters of Administration in respect of the estate
Section 51 of the Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961, primarily deals with the "Levy of fee" and specifies the rates and procedures for assessing court fees in suits filed in Rajasthan. It covers the computation of fees based on the value of the subject matter of the suit or appeal and provides the constitutional and procedural framework for fee assessment, including special provisions for certain types of suits such as those for probate, letters of administration, and land disputes. The section is significant for ensuring that court fees are levied uniformly and in accordance with the prescribed rates and is relevant for both civil and revenue matters. Below is a concise bullet-point legal commentary based on the available sources.
Notes:- Detailed civil or criminal penalties for non-payment or default are to be referred to Sections 51 and 65 of the Act and the relevant Rajasthan legislation.- All sections are to be read with the Rajasthan Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961, as amended from time闲 to time, including the most recent amendments.
The grant of Probate or Letters of Administration shall not be delayed by reason of the reference to the Collector under section 50, sub-section (2), or of a motion by the Collector under section 54, sub-section (5); but the Court shall make no grant of Probate or Letters of Administration until it is satisfied that a fee not less than that prescribed by this Act has been paid on the basis of the net value of the estate as furnished in the valuation accompanying the application, or in the amended valuation filed under section 54, sub-section (3):
Provided that the Court may grant Probate or Letters of Administration notwithstanding that the prescribed fee has not been paid, to the Administrator-General in his official capacity on his giving an undertaking to the satisfaction of the Court that the said fee will be paid within such time as may be fixed by the Court.
(1) Whenever a grant of Probate or Letters of Administration has been made in respect of the whole of the property belonging to an estate and the full fee payable under this Act in respect of the application for such grant has been paid thereon, no fee shall be payable when a like grant is made in respect of the whole or any part of the same property belonging to the same estate.
(2) Whenever such grant has been made in respect of any property forming part of an estate, the amount of fee actually paid under this Act in respect thereof shall be deducted when a like grant is made in respect of the property belonging to the same estate identical with or including the property to which the former grant relates.
(1) The Collector to whom a copy of the application and of the valuation has been sent under section 50, sub-section (2). shall examine the same and may make or cause to be made by any officer subordinate to him such inquiry, if any, as he thinks fit as to the correctness of the valuation or, where a part only of the property is situated in his district, of the valuation of that part, and may require the Collector of any other district in which any part of the property is situated to furnish him with the correct valuation thereof.
(2) Any Collector required under sub-section (1) to furnish the correct valuation of any property shall comply with the requisition after making or causing to be made by any officer subordinate to him such inquiry, if any, as he thinks fit.
(3) If the Collector is of opinion that the applicant has under-estimat
(1) The Court shall, when moved by the Collector under section 54, sub-section (5), hold or cause to be held by any Court or officer subordinate to it an inquiry as to the true value at which the estate of the deceased should have been estimated. The Collector shall be deemed to be a party to the inquiry.
(2) For the purposes of any such inquiry, the Court, or the subordinate Court or the officer authorised by the Court to hold the inquiry, may examine the applicant on oath either in person or by commission, and may take such further evidence as may be produced to prove the true value of the estate, and where the inquiry has been entrusted to a subordinate Court or officer, such Court, or officer shall return to the Court the evidence taken and report the result of the inquiry and such report and the evidence so taken shall be evidence in the proceedings.
(1) Where too low a fee has been paid on any Probate or Letters of Administration in consequence of any mistake or of its not being known at the time that some particular part of the estate belonged to the deceased, if any executor or administrator, acting under such probate or letters, apply to the Collector in the form set forth in Part II of Schedule III and pays within six months after the discovery of the mistake or of any effects not known at the time to have belonged to the deceased, the difference between the fee which ought to have been paid in the first instance on such probate or letters and the fee actually paid, the Collector shall, if satisfied that insufficient fee was paid in the first instance in consequence of a mistake and without any intention to defraud or to delay the payment of the proper fee, cause the probate or letters to be duly stamped.
(2) If, in a case
Section 56 of the Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961, addresses the consequences and procedural provisions related to the payment of court fees when the fee paid is found to be too low. It plays a crucial role in ensuring proper valuation and fee compliance in civil suits, thereby maintaining the integrity of the court fee system.
This concise commentary highlights the key legal aspects of Section 56, emphasizing its role in maintaining proper fee valuation, deterrence against undervaluation, and procedural enforcement within the Rajasthan civil court system.
In case of Letters of Administration on which too low a fee has been paid in the first instance the Collector shall not cause the same to be duly stamped in the manner aforesaid until the administrator has given such security to the Court by which the Letters of Administration have been granted as ought by law to have been given on the granting thereof in case the full value of the estate of the deceased had been then ascertained.
(1) If, at any time after the grant of the Probate or Letters of Administration of an estate, it is discovered that a higher fee has been paid than was payable according to the true value of the estate, the executor or administrator, as the case may be, may apply for a refund to the Collector to whom a copy of the valuation of the estate was sent under section 50, sub-section (2). The application shall be accompanied by an amended valuation in the form set forth in Part II of Schedule III together with the Probate or Letters of Administration upon which a refund is sought.
(2) If the Collector is satisfied that the amended valuation is correct, he shall,--
(i) endorse a certificate on the stamped Probate or Letters of Administration to the effect that so much of the fee represented by the stamp or stamps used has been refunded; and
&n
Any excess fee found to be payable by an applicant for Probate or Letters of Administration or by an executor or administrator or any costs under section 55, sub-section (4), or any penalty or forfeiture payable by any such executor or administrator may, on the certificate of the Board of Revenue, be recovered from the executor or administrator as if it were an arrear of land revenue.
The powers and duties of the Collector under this Chapter shall be subject to the control of the Board of Revenue.
(1) Where a plaint is rejected under Order VII, Rule 11, or memorandum of appeal is rejected under Order XLI, Rule 3 or Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908), the Court may, in its discretion, direct the refund to the plaintiff or the appellant of the fee either in whole or in part, paid on the plaint or memorandum of appeal which has been rejected.
(2) Where a memorandum of appeal is rejected on the ground that it was not presented within the time allowed by the Law of Limitation, one-half of the fee shall be refunded.
(1) Where a plaint or memorandum of appeal which has been rejected by the lower Court is ordered to be received, or where a suit is remanded in appeal for a fresh decision by the lower Court, the Court making the order or remanding the appeal may direct the refund to the appellant of the full amount of fee paid on the memorandum of appeal; and, if the remand is on second appeal also on the memorandum of appeal in the first appellate Court, and, if, the remand is on an appeal from the judgment of single Judge of the High Court of Rajasthan under any law for the time being in force, also on the memorandum of second appeal and memorandum of appeal in the first appellate Court.
(2) Where an appeal is remanded in second appeal or in an appeal from the judgment of a single Judge of the High Court of Rajasthan under any law for the time being in force, for a fresh decision by the lower ap
The Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961, governs the payment of court fees and the valuation of suits in the state of Rajasthan. Section 62 specifically addresses the refund of court fees in cases where appeals are remanded for fresh decisions.
Section 62 provides for the refund of court fees paid by an appellant when their appeal is remanded by a higher court for a fresh decision by the lower court. This provision ensures that litigants are not penalized financially for procedural outcomes that are not a result of their actions.
The scope of Section 62 is limited to appeals that are remanded for reconsideration. It does not apply to cases where the appeal is dismissed or where the lower court's decision is upheld. The section aims to alleviate the financial burden on appellants who are compelled to re-litigate their cases due to procedural remands.
Section 62 does not prescribe any punishment. Instead, it focuses on the procedural aspect of court fees and the financial implications of remanding appeals.
(1) Where an application for a review of judgment is admitted on the ground of some mistake or error apparent on the face of the record, and on rehearing the Court reverses or modifies its former decision on that ground, it shall direct the refund to the applicant of so much of the fee paid on the applicant as exceeds the fee payable on any other application to such Court under Article 11 (g) and (h) of Schedule II.
(2) Any fee paid by mistake or inadvertence shall be ordered to be refunded to the person paying the same.
Nothingcontained in this Act shall render the following document chargeable with anyfee:--
(i)Mukhtarnama, Vakalatnama or other written authority to institute or defend asuit when executed by a member of any of the Armed Forces of the Union not incivil employment;
(ii)application relating to supply for irrigation of water belonging to Government;
(iii)first application (other than a petition containing a criminal charge ofinformation) for the summons of a witness or other person to attend either togive evidence or to produce a document or in respect of the production or filingof an exhibit not being an affidavit made for the immediate propose of beingproduced in Court;
(iv)bail bonds in criminal cases, recognizances to prosecute or give evidence and
The State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, reduce or remit, in the whole or in any part of the territory of this State, all or any of the fees chargeable under this Act, and may, in like manner, cancel or vary such notification.
1[The State Government may by Notification in the Official Gazette, exempt, in public interest, any class of persons from all or any of the fees chargeable for any category of suits under this act.]
____________
1. Inserted by Rajasthan Finance Act, 2007.
1[Where the Court refers the parties to a suit to any one of the mode of settlement of dispute referred to in Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Central Act No. 5 of 1908) and the matter is settled by one of the most provided under Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the plaintiff shall be entitled to a certificate from the Court authorising him to receive back from the Collector, the full amount of the fee paid in the respect of such plaint.]
__________________
1. Added by Rajasthan Court-fees and Suit Valuation (Amendment) Act, 2009 dated 11.09.2009.
Section 65(b) of the Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961, provides a legal mechanism for the refund of court fees paid in civil suits under specific circumstances, primarily focusing on dispute resolution and settlement outside the court process. It aims to promote amicable settlement and reduce litigation burden.
Section 65(b) stipulates that when a suit is settled either through court-referred dispute resolution modes under Section 89 of the CPC or amicably outside court, the court shall issue a certificate enabling the plaintiff to claim a refund of the court fees paid. The refund is contingent upon the dispute being resolved outside the adversarial process.
Section 65(b) applies to:- Civil suits where disputes are resolved amicably or via court-referred mechanisms.- Cases where the parties withdraw or settle the suit before judgment.- Situations promoting alternative dispute resolution (ADR) to lessen judicial workload.- It does not cover cases where the dispute is not settled or withdrawn; the section is specifically for refunds upon settlement.
Section 65(b) does not prescribe any punishment. Its purpose is to facilitate the refund process for court fees when disputes are amicably settled, encouraging parties to resolve disputes without protracted litigation.
This commentary synthesizes the provisions, judicial interpretations, and policy objectives related to Section 65(b), emphasizing its role in promoting amicable settlement and judicial efficiency.
(1) All fees chargeable under this Act shall be collected by stamps.
(2) The stamps used to denote any fee chargeable under this Act shall be impressed or adhesive or partly impressed and partly adhesive, as the State Government may by notification in the Official Gazette, from time to time direct.
Where any document which ought to bear a stamp under this Act is amended in order merely to correct a mistake and to make it conform to the original intention of the parties, it shall not be necessary to impose fresh stamp.
No document requiring a stamp under this Act shall be filed or acted upon in any proceeding in any Court or office until the stamp has been cancelled.
(2) Such officer as the Court or the Head of the Office may from time to time, appoint shall, on receiving any such document, forthwith effect such cancellation by punching out the figure head so as to leave the amount designated on the stamp untouched, and the part removed by punching shall be burnt or otherwise destroyed.
Section 68 of the Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961 deals with the cancellation of stamp duty on documents (such as plaint, appeal, or other legal instruments) when the court determines that the amount or value indicated therein is not correctly stated or is inadequately stamped. The provision ensures that the appropriate court fee is determined based on the true value of the subject matter of the suit or appeal, preventing under-payment or evasion of court fees. The section plays a crucial role in the "Determination of Fee" and the "Valuation of Suits", ensuring that the fees paid correspond correctly to the economic value of the litigation matter.
Section 68 provides for the cancellation of a stamp (or reduction/remittal of fee) where it is found that the value of the property or the amount involved in the suit or appeal has been incorrectly stated or under-stamped. Once the court determines the correct value by appropriate evidence or inquiry, it may order that the stamp be cancelled or that the correct fee be paid. The section ensures a fair and accurate determination of court fees by aligning them with the actual value of the subject matter, and provides a mechanism for recalculating fees when discrepancies or fraud in valuation are discovered.
This section is primarily applied when:- The fee or stamp paid is less than or more than the amount appropriate for the subject matter of the suit.- There is a misrepresentation or under-invoicing of the property value or amount claimed.- There is a dispute or ambiguity in calculating the court fee based on the valuation rules prescribed under the Act.- It allows courts to recalculate and determine the appropriate fees if the correct value is found to be different from the initially stated value.
While the Rajasthan Court Fees Act, 1961, does not prescribe explicit penalties for under-stamping or improperly stating the value of a property in the context of Section 68, the provision allows the court to treat the matter as a proceedings-in-personam, where failure to pay the correct fee could result in delays or dismissal of the case. Moreover, any misrepresentation may also attract consequences under general laws regarding fraud or suppression of evidence.
Introduction to the Act - The Rajasthan Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961 governs the levy and collection of court fees and the valuation of suits in Rajasthan. It provides the procedural framework for ensuring that fees are correctly paid based on the value of the subject matter. [Rajasthan Court Fees Act Overview]
Scope - The Act applies to valuations in civil, commercial, and other suits where the economic value of the subject is in dispute and determines the fee structure for efficient adjudication. [Valuation of Suits]
Essentials - The value and corresponding fees must be determined based on the proper estimation of property or amount涉及的交易情况，以确保费用的准确性。 [Proper estimation]
Section 68 Specifics - Section 68 deals with the explicit process of recalculating and correcting fees when there is a discrepancy or fraud in the stated value. [Section 68]
Court Authority - The court has the power to cancel or adjust the fee after proper valuation and evidence submission. [Court Fees Act, 1961]
Valuation Principles - Under Section 68, ensuring the accurate fee structure is maintained to prevent disputes and delays in litigation. [Fee Structure Act]
Determination of Fees - Court fees must correspond accurately with the true value of the subject matter to ensure fair proceedings. [Fee Rules]
Note: The Act primarily provides for administrative corrections and does not include explicit penal provisions under Section 68 itself; however, fraudulent valuation may have broader legal implications under Indian law.
Where allowance is made under this Act for damaged or spoiled stamps or where fee already paid is directed to be refunded to any person by an order of Court, the Collector may, on the application of the person concerned, pay to him the amount of fee, or, where damaged or spoiled stamps are produced, he may, after satisfying himself about their genuineness, given in lieu thereof the same amount or value in stamps of the same or any other description, or if the applicant so desired, the same amount or value in money: provided that in all cases where money is paid in cash, a deduction shall be made of six naye paise for each rupee or fraction thereof. No such deduction shall, however, be made where refund is claimed in respect of any fee paid in pursuance of an order of Court which has been varied or reversed in appeal.
Any person appointed to sell stamps, who disobeys any Rule made under this Act, and any person, not so appointed, who sells or offers for sale any stamps, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to five hundred rupees, or with both.
(1) The High Court may make rules to provide for or regulate all or any of the following matters namely:--
(a) the fees payable for serving and executing processes issued by the High Court in its appellate jurisdiction and by the civil and criminal Courts subordinate thereto;
(b) the remuneration of persons employed by the Court mentioned in clause (a) in the service or execution of processes;
(c) the fixing by District and Sessions Judges and District Magistrates of the number of process servers necessary to be employed for the service and execution of process issued from their respective Courts and the Courts subordinate thereto;
(d) the display in each Court a table in English and in Hindi showing the fees payable for the service and execution of
Section 71 of the Rajasthan Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961, confers power upon the High Court of Rajasthan to formulate rules concerning court fees and suit valuation. This section is pivotal in ensuring standardized procedures and fees across courts within Rajasthan, facilitating efficient administration of justice.
Section 71 grants the High Court the authority to make rules related to:- Fees payable for serving and executing processes issued by the High Court in its appellate jurisdiction [Source: "Section 71 in The Rajasthan Court Fees and Suits"]- The display of fee tables in courts in English and Hindi [Source: "Section 71(1)(d) in The Rajasthan Court Fees and Suits"]- Any other matters necessary for the regulation of court fees and suit valuation [Implied from the section's broad language]
This commentary synthesizes available sources to provide a comprehensive legal analysis of Section 71, emphasizing its role in rule-making, procedural regulation, and administrative transparency within Rajasthan's judicial system.
(1) The Board of Revenue may, with the previous sanction of the State Government, make rules consistent with this Act to provide for or regulate all or any of the following matters, namely:--
(a) The fees chargeable for serving and executing processes issued by the Board of Revenue and by the Revenue Courts;
(b) the remuneration of the persons necessary to be employed for the service and execution of such process;
(c) the fixing by Collectors of the number of persons necessary to be employed for the service and execution of such processes.
(d) the guidance of Collectors in the exercise of their powers under Chapter VI.
(2) All rules made under this section shall be published in the Official Gazette and on
(1)The State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, make rules toprovide for the following matters, namely:--
(a)the supply of stamps to be used under this Act,
(b)the number of stamps to be used for denoting any fee chargeable under this Act,
(c)the keeping of accounts of all stamps used under this Act,
(d)the circumstances in which stamps may be held to be damaged or spoiled,
(e)the circumstances and manner in which, and the authorities by which, allowancefor used, damaged or spoiled stamps may be made,
(f)the regulation of the sale of stamp to be used under this Act, the persons bywhom alone such stamps may be sold and the duties and remune
(1) The Rajasthan Court-fees Act (Adaptation) Ordinance, 1950 (Rajasthan Ordinance 9 of 1950), the Rajasthan Suits Valuation Act, 1958 (Rajasthan Act III of 1958) and all enactments amending the aforesaid Ordinance and Act are hereby repealed and the provisions of the Rajasthan General Clauses Act, 1955 (Rajasthan Act VIII of 1955), shall apply to such repeal.
(2) Notwithstanding such repeal, all suits and proceedings instituted before the commencement of this Act and all proceedings by way of appeal, revision or otherwise arising therefrom whether instituted before or after such commencement shall be governed by the provisions of the said Ordinance and Act and the Rules made thereunder.
RATES OF AD VALOREM FEES LEVIABLE ON THE PLAINTS IN RAJASTHAN
SCHEDULE-I
Article Particulars Proper fee
(1) (2) (3)
1. Plaint or written statement pleading a set-off or counter-claim or memorandum of appeal presented to any Court,--
(i) When the amount or value of the subject matter in dispute does not exceed rupees 15,000 2 ½ per cent of the amount or value
(ii) When the amount or value exceeds rupees 15,000 but does not exceed rupees 75,000 Rupees 375 plus 7½ per cent of the amount or value exceeding rupees 15,000
(iii) When the amount or value exceeds rupees 75,000 but does not exceed rupees 2,50,000 Ru
SCHEDULE - II
Article Particulars Proper fee
(1) (2) (3)
1. (i) Petition in a suit under the Native Convert's Marriage Dissolution Act, 1866 (Central Act XXI of 1866). 1[Ten rupees]
(ii) Petition, plaint or memorandum of appeal when presented to a Court under the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939 (Central Act XIII of 1939). 1[Twenty rupees]
(iii) petition under the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 (Central Act IV of 1869) excluding petitions under section 44 of that Act, and every memorandum of appeal under section 55 of that Act. 1[Twenty rupees]
(iv) Plaint or memorandum of appeal under the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936 (Central Act III
SCHEDULE III
PART I
(See section 50)
FORM OF VALUATION (TO BE USED WITH SUCH MODIFICATIONS, IF ANY, AS MAY BE NECESSARY) OF ESTATE
IN THE COURT OF
Re: Probate of the Will or.......................... (or Administration) of the Estate of.......................... deceased.
1. I, (A.B.), solemnly affirm/make oath and say that I am the executor (or one of the executors or one of the next of kin) of..... deceased, and that I have truly set forth in Annexure A to this Form of Valuation all the estate of which the above-named deceased died possessed or to which he was entitled at the time of his death, and which has come, or is likely to come, to many hands.
Elevate your legal practice with advanced AI-driven research and drafting solutions. Experience unmatched efficiency, precision, and security, tailored exclusively for legal professionals.
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
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
AI Assistant
