Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
The courts have consistently emphasized that the valuation for court fee purposes depends on the relief sought and the nature of the suit, with fixed fees applicable in straightforward declaratory suits without consequential reliefs ["Ansar Nawaz Khan Mutawalli Waqf Bhullo Begum VS Adeel Ahmad - Allahabad"], ["Mannaur Ansari VS Juved Ahmad - Allahabad"].
Analysis and Conclusion:
References:- ["Ansar Nawaz Khan Mutawalli Waqf Bhullo Begum VS Adeel Ahmad - Allahabad"]- ["Ganeshi Bai Alias Guddi v. Ajab Singh - Madhya Pradesh"]- ["Kumarika Subarna Rekha Mani Devi VS Ramakrishna Deoand - Andhra Pradesh"]- ["Kanta VS Mahender - Punjab and Haryana"]- ["Kaniz Fatima VS Imran Khan - Allahabad"]- ["Mannaur Ansari VS Juved Ahmad - Allahabad"]- ["Rakesh Rai S/o Raghunath Rai vs Shivarama S/o Vishwanath - Karnataka"]- ["Sushil Suri VS Harish Suri - Allahabad"]
Filing a lawsuit can be daunting, especially when navigating court fees. One common question arises: Is there a provision for a fixed court fee of Rs. 22 in a declaratory suit? This post breaks down the rules under the Court Fees Act, 1870, focusing on when this nominal fee applies, key legal provisions, judicial interpretations, and important exceptions. While this information is based on established legal precedents, it is for general educational purposes only and not a substitute for professional legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your specific case.
A declaratory suit seeks a court's declaration on a legal right or status without demanding further action like possession or injunction. Under the Court Fees Act, such suits can qualify for a fixed court fee of Rs. 22 if no consequential relief is claimed. This provision simplifies access to justice for straightforward declarations.
The main legal finding is clear: The provision for a fixed court fee of Rs. 22 in a declaratory suit is recognized as applicable where no consequential relief is claimed, and the suit falls under specific provisions of the Court Fees Act that prescribe a fixed fee for declaratory decrees without additional reliefs. SHAILENDRA BHARDWAJ VS CHANDRA PAL - 2012 0 Supreme(SC) 813
Article 17(iii) of Schedule II explicitly states: Plaint or memorandum of appeal in each of the following suits: ... To obtain a declaratory decree where no consequential relief is prayed. This mandates a fixed fee of Rs. 22 for pure declaratory relief. Courts have consistently upheld this, noting it applies to suits solely for declaration, provided no consequential relief is claimed. SHAILENDRA BHARDWAJ VS CHANDRA PAL - 2012 0 Supreme(SC) 813
This fixed fee structure is designed to encourage claims focused purely on legal rights without complicating factors.
To qualify:- No consequential relief: Avoid prayers for possession, injunction, or cancellation of documents.- Relinquish other claims: Plaintiffs may strategically give up additional reliefs. The law allows plaintiffs to give up certain reliefs and pay a fixed fee on the remaining reliefs. Nemi Chand VS Edward Mills Company LTD. - 1952 0 Supreme(SC) 72
For example, if you're in possession and challenging a document as void or non-binding, a fixed fee often suffices. In one case, If 'B' who is a non-executant, is in possession and sues for a declaration that the deed is null or void and does not bind him or his share, he has to merely pay a fixed court fee of Rs19.50 under Article 17(iii) of Second Schedule of the Act. Meena VS Ramji Lal @ Ajay - 2023 Supreme(P&H) 835 Note: Amounts may vary slightly by jurisdiction or amendments, but Rs. 22 is the standard referenced here. SHAILENDRA BHARDWAJ VS CHANDRA PAL - 2012 0 Supreme(SC) 813
Judicial practice supports this flexibility: Plaintiffs can relinquish additional reliefs to qualify for the fixed fee, but should clearly specify this to avoid disputes. Nemi Chand VS Edward Mills Company LTD. - 1952 0 Supreme(SC) 72
Not all declaratory suits get the fixed fee. Key limitations include:- Consequential reliefs claimed: Possession, injunction, or instrument cancellation triggers ad valorem fees under Section 7(iv-A) or other provisions. If the suit involves additional reliefs such as possession, injunction, or cancellation of instruments, then the fixed fee of Rs. 22 may not be applicable, and ad valorem or other prescribed fees would be payable. SHAILENDRA BHARDWAJ VS CHANDRA PAL - 2012 0 Supreme(SC) 813- Lack of possession: Non-executants without possession challenging sale deeds must pay ad valorem. Non-executant plaintiffs challenging validity of sale deeds must pay ad valorem court fees due to lack of possession. Mandeep Kaur vs Harpreet Singh - 2025 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 3843- Market value basis: In some declaratory suits involving property, fees are based on market value at plaint presentation. In suits for declaration without consequential relief, court fees must be calculated based on the market value of the property as of the date of plaint presentation. Shiny Benoy VS Leelamma Kuryan (Died) - 2024 Supreme(Ker) 1640
Another nuance: For void instruments not binding on the plaintiff, a declaration is sufficient... hence, payment of ad valorem Court-fee by the plaintiff not required-- only fixed Court-fee will be payable. Sunil Radhelia VS Awadh Narayan - 2010 Supreme(MP) 665
Courts emphasize averments in the plaint over defenses: Court fee should be directed to be paid only on the basis of averments made in the plaint and not what the defendant states in his defence. Anand Varsha Anand VS Ashok Kumar - 2012 Supreme(P&H) 1446
Courts routinely examine reliefs claimed:- Fixed fee upheld for simple declarations. SHAILENDRA BHARDWAJ VS CHANDRA PAL - 2012 0 Supreme(SC) 813- Relinquishment strategy recognized. Nemi Chand VS Edward Mills Company LTD. - 1952 0 Supreme(SC) 72- In partition suits alleging joint possession, fixed fee under Article 17(vi). Anand Varsha Anand VS Ashok Kumar - 2012 Supreme(P&H) 1446
A notable ruling: Simple declaratory suits under Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act pay fixed fee per Schedule II, Article 17(iii), not ad valorem under Section 7(4)(c). Section 8 of the Suits Valuation Act doesn't apply. PREM NATH WADHAWAN VS INDER RAJ WADHAWAN - 1993 Supreme(Del) 145
In succession matters, fixed fee for declaration alone. SHAHISTA QURESHI VS STATE OF M. P. - 2002 Supreme(MP) 1026
These decisions ensure fees align with relief nature, preventing undervaluation.
To leverage the fixed fee:1. Draft carefully: Limit to declaration, explicitly relinquish others.2. Specify possession: Allege constructive/actual possession if applicable.3. Anticipate challenges: Courts verify based on plaint; be precise.4. Amend if needed: Pay additional fees on direction, but aim for fixed initially.
Trial courts must carefully examine the reliefs claimed and the reliefs relinquished to determine the correct court fee. Nemi Chand VS Edward Mills Company LTD. - 1952 0 Supreme(SC) 72
Note jurisdictional variations, like Kerala Court-fees Act amendments affecting fees post-1999. K. RAVEENDRANATHAN NAIR VS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 2017 6 Supreme 373 Always check local rules.
In appeals or amendments, fees like Taka 600 have been allowed in distinct claims, showing flexibility. Broj Lal Pal son of late Ombika Charan Pal of Village- Pashim Fotehpur Police Station- Sadar District- Noakhali.-Vs-Uttam kumar Pal son of late Har Lal Pal of Village- Master Para Police Station- Sadar District- Noakhali and others. - 2024 Supreme(BD)(SC) 11790
The fixed Rs. 22 court fee provision offers relief for pure declaratory suits without consequential claims, backed by Article 17(iii), Schedule II. However, inclusions like possession or challenges without possession shift to ad valorem. In conclusion, the provision for a fixed court fee of Rs. 22 in a declaratory suit is applicable when the suit only seeks a declaration without consequential relief, and the reliefs are claimed or relinquished accordingly. SHAILENDRA BHARDWAJ VS CHANDRA PAL - 2012 0 Supreme(SC) 813Nemi Chand VS Edward Mills Company LTD. - 1952 0 Supreme(SC) 72
Key Takeaways:- Fixed Rs. 22 for declaration only. SHAILENDRA BHARDWAJ VS CHANDRA PAL - 2012 0 Supreme(SC) 813- Relinquish extras strategically. Nemi Chand VS Edward Mills Company LTD. - 1952 0 Supreme(SC) 72- Possession matters for non-executants. Mandeep Kaur vs Harpreet Singh - 2025 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 3843- Base on plaint averments. Anand Varsha Anand VS Ashok Kumar - 2012 Supreme(P&H) 1446
This guide demystifies court fees, but laws evolve—verify with current statutes and seek tailored advice. Stay informed to litigate smarter.
#CourtFeesAct #DeclaratorySuit #LegalGuide
aforesaid Act and as such only the fixed Court fees was required to be paid as indicated in plaint and not ad valorem Court fee. ... From a perusal of aforesaid provision, it is evident that computation of Court fee payable in certain suits particularly with regard to declaratory decree with consequential relief is indicated in Section 7(iv)(a) whereunder provisions of sub-section(iv-A) is an exception. ... Upon consideration of submissions advanced ....
pay a fixed court - fee of Rs.19.50 under Art.17(ii) of Second Schedule of the Act. ... The said provision was taken note of, by this Court in Mohan Lal (supra) and, this Court held in paragraph 9 as under: - ... "9. ... S.7 (iv) (c) provides that in suits for a declaratory decree with consequential relief, the court - fee shall be computed according to the amount at which the relief sought is valued in the plaint. ... Thus, when t....
fixed court fee. ... C. , and in those appeals a fixed Court-fee was payable. ... II and a fixed court-fee of Rs 10/- was payable. The several States had amended this provision, but we are only concerned with the Madras amendment which added Article 17-A and 17-B. ... The fee prescribed is either ad valorem on the value of the subject matter or a fixed fee. Sect....
Section 7(iv)(c) provides that in suits for a declaratory decree with consequential relief, the court fee shall be computed according to the amount at which the relief sought is valued in the plaint. ... If `B', who is a non-executant, is in possession and sues for a declaration that the deed is null or void and does not bind him or his share, he has to merely pay a fixed court fee of Rs. 19.50 under Article 17(iii) of Second Schedule of the Act. ... But the form is different and #HL_S....
If a question of deficiency in court-fee in respect of any plaint or memorandum of appeal is raised by an officer mentioned in Section 24-A the Court shall, before proceeding further with the suit or appeal, record a finding whether the court-fee paid is sufficient or not. ... Whenever a question of the proper amount of court-fee payable is raised otherwise than under sub-section (3), the Court shall decide such question before proceeding with any ot....
Section 7(iv)(c) provides that in suits for a declaratory decree with consequential relief, the court fee shall be computed according to the amount at which the relief sought is valued in the plaint. ... If B, who is a non-executant, is in possession and sues for a declaration that the deed is null or void and does not bind him or his share, he has to merely pay a fixed court fee of Rs. 19.50 under Article 17(iii) of the Second Schedule of the Act. ... Accordingly, he has computed the....
fee. ... fee and prayed for allowing the plaintiff to deposit court fee at taka 600/- ... for depositing advolarum court fee on the back of allowing the application for amendment as ... fee amounting to taka 45,100/- and then the court directed the plaintiff ... So, we don’t find any illegality on the part of the plaintiff to pay taka 600/- as court fee upon two distinct
Analysing Sections 25 and 7 of the Court Fees Act, I am of the considered opinion that the court below is justified in directing the plaintiff to remit the court fee under section 25(d)(i), but the market value of the property is to be fixed as on the date of presentation of the plaint. ... Being a suit for declaratory decree, the counsel for the respondents argued that the suit is to be valued under Section 25(d)(i) of the Court Fees Act. 4. ... Regarding the valuati....
Furthermore, since the petitioners(plaintiffs) are not the executants of the sale deeds, they are not liable to pay ad valorem court fee under Section 7 of the Court Fees Act, 1870, but only a fixed fee is to be paid by them. ... It has been held that where a non-executant, being in possession, seeks only a declaration that a sale deed is invalid, he may pay a fixed court fee. ... The defendants filed the present application, submitting that though t....
Section 7(iv)(c) provides that in suits for a declaratory decree with consequential relief, the court fee shall be computed according to the amount at which the relief sought is valued in the plaint. ... If 'B' who is a non-executant, is in possession and sues for a declaration that the deed is null or void and does not bind him or his share, he has to merely pay a fixed court fee of Rs19.50 under Article 17(iii) of Second Schedule of the Act. ... relief of possession, he has to pay ad....
As per that provision, fixed court fee of Rs.2,000/-was provided. This provision was, however, omitted with effect from June 01, 1999. The court fee became payable as per Section 52 of the 1959 Act. 14) In the present case, as noted above, when Section 260A of the IT Act was introduced by way of amendment with effect from October 01, 1998, it contained provision in the form of clause (2) of sub-section (2) thereof relating to payment of court fee as well.
There is no specific provision under the Court Fee Act, 1870 that provides for determination of valuation for the relief of partition and, therefore, Article 17(vi) of the Court Fee Act is attracted and a fixed Court fee alone is payable. The learned counsel also relies on a judgment of the Full Bench of the Lahore High Court in Asa Ram and Ors. v. Jagan Nath and Ors., (1934) AIR The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the plaintiff states that the suit property is held, according to the averments made in the plaint, in joint possession with the defendant and that he wan....
The plea taken in the written statement cannot be taken into consideration. The Trial Court has held that the averments made to the plaint with respect to payability of the Court fee are relevant. For declaratory relief the fixed Court fee has been paid.
( 5 ) NOW for declaratory relief the fixed court fee is payable as per Schedule II, Article 17 of the Court Fees Act. Valdya nath, that in a case where fixed Court fee is payable as per Schedule II, Article 17 of the court Fees Act for the relief of declaration section 8 of the Suits Valuation Act is inapplicable for valuing the suit for the purpose of pecuniary jurisdiction as that section applies when ad valorem Court fee is payable in certain types of suits. It has been held by this Court in Dharamraj Singh vs.
The valuation for the purpose of court fee in a simple declaratory suit is governed by Schedule 2, Article 17, Clause (3) which prescribes a fixed court fee of Rs. l9. Under Section 8 of the Suits Valuation Act, where in suits other than those referred to in the Court-fees Act, 1870, Section 7, paras 5,6,and 9, and para 10 clause (d) court fees are payable at ad valorem under the Court-fees Act, 1870, the value as determinable for the computation of court-fees and the value for the purposes of jurisdiction shall be the same. A suit, where the relief prayed for is for declar....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
