MARIYAPPA Vs. SOWBHAGYAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision is taken up for final disposal by consent.

(2.) THE revision petition is filed by the defendant aggrieved by the dismissal of an application for appointing a Commissioner to ascertain the present market value of the suit property u/s. 18 of the Karnataka Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1958. Section 18 of the said Act reads as follows:

(3.) SUCH is the position of law. The discretion given to the Trial Court to decide about the correctness of the value of the relief claimed in the plaint. It is certainly open to the petitioner to question the same and an application has been filed with same regard. The Court cannot reject the same. It is duty- bound to appoint a Commissioner to go and verify the value of the property so that the proper Court-fee is collected on such value. In this view, the impugned order is setaside and the CRP is allowed directing the Trial Court to appoint a Commissioner to ascertain the present market value of the suit property.