P K DAMODARAN UNNI Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order covers only the maintainability of the Appeal in this Court, an objection that was raised by the learned Government Pleader in the course of the hearing. The plaintiff who is the appellant purchased a power tiller under hire purchase on a loan of Rs. 9,822.47 granted by the State Government to be repaid in ten half yearly instalments. To secure the loan the plaintiff executed a simple mortgage. The instalments fell into arrears and when coercive steps were started for realising the money the plaintiff brought the suit (A) to declare as void the hire purchase agreement being vitiated by mistake of fact or alternatively to cancel it being vitiated by misrepresentation (B) to rescind the hire purchase agreement as the Government had committed breach thereof (C) to allow the plaintiff, as a consequence, to realise Rs. 5,038.77 as consideration that bad failed or as compensation with future interest (D) to declare as a consequence that the mortgage is extinguished (E) to restrain the Government by a permanent injunction from recovering the hire amount under the Revenue Recovery Act and (F) to grant other incidental and consequential reliefs. As for valuation, the plaintiff stated that A and B reliefs were valued at Rs 9,822.50 being the market value of the tiller and that the other reliefs being ancillary do not require separate court fees. He thus put the total valuation for all the reliefs at Rs. 9,822.50 and paid a court fee of Rs. 963 advalorem. Consistent with this valuation the suit was instituted in the Subordinate Judge's Court. After trial the suit was dismissed and the plaintiff has brought this appeal. In the memorandum of appeal he put the valuation at Rs. 9,822 as in the court below and paid a court fee of Rs. 963, though he added at the feet of the memorandum: "The subject matter of the suit is over Rs, 10,000", without indicating its basis.

(2.) Under S.13(1), Civil Courts Act "Appeals from the decrees and orders of a Munsiff's Court and where the amount or value of the subject matter of the suit does not exceed ten thousand rupees from the original decrees and orders of a Subordinate Judge's Court shall, when such appeal are allowed by law, lie to the District Court." In order to sustain the appeal in this Court, counsel for the appellant contended that irrespective of the valuation in the plaint, the "amount or value of the subject matter of the suit" exceeds Rs 10,000 and that the appeal is therefore competent. In aid of this contention he cited a number of decisions where the question of valuation of the subject matter for leave to the Privy Council, Federal Court and Supreme Court arose. We shall presently note these decisions but before doing so and considering their impact, we must point out that the plaint no where states that the amount or value of the subject matter is above Rs. 10,000 and all that the memorandum of appeal contains is the bald statement about the subject matter noticed above. The subject matter of the suit was avoidance or cancellation of the hire purchase agreement of which the consideration was Rs. 9,822 which the plaintiff received as loan from the Government for purchasing the tiller. About this value there is no doubt or dispute. If on the other hand it is less than the real or market value, then on the authority of Kunju Kesavan v. M. M. Philip, AIR 1964 SC 164 :

(3.) Turning to the cases, the earliest of them Lagandoo Prasad v. Roid, AIR 1919 Calcutta 118, was concerned with applications for leave to appeal to the Privy Council. One of the conditions for the leave was that the subject matter of the suit in the court of first instance was Rs. 10,000 or upwards and the amount or value of the subject matter in dispute on appeal to the Privy Council was of the same value or upwards. So far as relevant, the value of the subject matter which was in dispute on appeal was whether the plaintiff was entitled to Rs. 5,000 as damages and also whether he was entitled to a declaration of certain rights as a riparian owner. When both the matters were taken into consideration, the value of the subject matter of the suit and of the appeal was upwards of Rs. 10,000. As the test was satisfied leave was granted. The decision is hardly of any assistance to the appellant.