KANAHIA LAL Vs. RAM KISHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a defendant's application in revision. The plaintiffs filed a suit for ejectment. They alleged that one Jagannath was a tenant-at-will of the land in dispute. He had died and the tenancy had been determined on account of his death. The defendants were his executors and were in possession of the land. The plaintiff wanted that they should be ejected and also claimed mesne profits from them. The plaintiffs valued the relief for possession under Section 7 (xi) (cc) of the Court-fees Act.

(2.) The defendants contested the suit and pleaded inter alia that the suit was undervalued and the court-fee paid was insufficient. They contended that the suit was a simple suit for possession against persons who were not admitted to be tenants. The plaintiffs were therefore bound to value the suit at the market value of the property under Section 7 (v) of the Court-fees Act. If they valued the suit at that figure it would be found that the court-fee paid was insufficient and the suit was not triable by the Court in which it had been filed.

(3.) The Munsif who was dealing with the suit did not accept the contention of the defendants and held that the plaintiffs had correctly valued the suit under Section 7 (xi) (cc) of the Court-fees Act. The court-fee paid by them was, therefore, sufficient, the suit had been properly valued and the Court had jurisdiction to try the suit.