KAPPURAMA MUDALIAR Vs. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff in the suit is the revision petit/oner herein. THE plaintiff filed the suit against the State of Tamil Nadu and two others for a declaration that the revenue sale held by the Revenue Authorities on 9.10.1973 is null and void. THE plaintiff valued the suit for the purpose of court-fee and jurisdiction under Sec.25(d) of the Court-Fees Act. A check-slip was issued by the Court-fee Examiner pointing out that the suit should be valued and court-fee paid under Sec40(1) of the Court-Fees Act on the market value of the property. THEre was an enquiry and the trial Court found that the suit should be valued under Sec40(1) of the Court-Fees Act. A revision was preferred against that order and the same was dismissed. Later, the trial Court held that in this suit, the plaintiff should value the subject-matter at its market value. THE Plaintif is aggrieved by this order and has come on revision.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel on both sides and perused the papers. The short point that arises for decision is whether under Sec.40(1) of the Tamil Nadu Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, the court-fee is payable on the market value or on the value of the property for which the document in question was executed.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner cited a decision reported in Andalammal v. B.Kanniah, (1971)2 M.L.J. 205 84 L.W. 645: A.I.R. ( 1972 ) Mad. 5 wherein the learned Judge has held that Sec40(1) of the Court-Fees Act refers to -the amount or value of the property, for which the document was executed.- It is then observed that the basis for the purpose of valuation shall be the amount or value mentioned in the document sought to be cancelled and that there is. no warrant for ignoring the plain language of the section and holding that the value shall be the market value of the property.