HINDUSTAN PENCILS LTD Vs. SWAROOP SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard arguments in order to prima facie determine whether the suit has been properly valued for the purposes of court fees and jurisdiction as far as relief of rendition of accounts is concerned. This suit is based with regard to the infringement of the trade mark of the plaintiff and on the ground of passing off of the goods of the defendant as those of the plaintiff. It is averred in the plaint that plaintiff estimates that it would be entitled to approximately Rs. 10 lakhs if accounts are gone into and he fixed the value for purposes of Court fee of Rs. 1,000/- and for the purposes of jurisdiction, he fixed the amount of Rs. 10,00,600/- The relief of injunction has also been sought in the plainti.

(2.) According to the rules framed by the Punjab High Court, which are applicable to Delhi, in a suit for rendition of accounts, the plaintiff is given a discretion to put any value for purposes of court fees and separate value for purposes of jurisdiction. The provisions of Section 7(iv)(f) of the Court Fees Act pertaining to the valuation for the purposes of court fee in a suit for rendition of accounts came up for consideration before the Supreme Court in a number of judgments.

(3.) In Meenakshisundram Chettiar vs. Venkatachalam Chettiar AIR 1979 Supreme Court 989, had laid down that ordinarily the Court shall not examine the correctness of the valuation chosen by the plaintiff but plaintiff cannot act arbitrarily in this regard and if plaintiff chooses whimsically a ridiculous figure, it is tantamount to not exercising his right in this regard. In such a case it is not only open to the court but it is its duty to reject such a valuation. The difficulty which arises for consideration in such like suit is as to on what basis the plaintiff would be deemed to have manifestly and deliberately underestimated the relief for the purposes of court fees. This was clarified by the Supreme Court in the judgment given in M/s. Commercial Aviation & Travel Co. vs. Vimal Pannalal, AIR 1988 Supreme Court 1636. In the said case also, the plaintiff had claimed that on rendition of accounts the plaintiff may be entitled to have Rs. 25 lakhs but he had valued the suit for purposes of court fee at Rs.500/-. The Supreme Court held as follows:-