KAILASH CHAND Vs. VTH A C J MEERUT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Short question involved in this appeal under Section 5-A of the Court Fees Act, 1870 as amended by J.P. Act. No. XIX of 1938 whether under the facts of the present case the Court fee is payable by the plaintiff under Section 7 (IV-A) or under Article 17 (iii) of Schedule II of the Court Fees Act.

(2.) For determination of the controversy in hand the facts in short are that plaintiff-appellant filed suit No. 680 of 1996 against the respondents alleging that Sri Musuddi Lal the common ancestor of the plaintiff and defendants created Hindu undivided family during his life time and was Karta of the said family. The suit property belonged to the Hindu Undivided family. The said Musuddi Lal was never exclusive owner of the said property. He died of cancer on 14-12-1988 Defendant No. 2 sent a notice dated 14-5-1996 to the sons of the plaintiff alleging execution of will date 11-8-1988 by the said Musaddi Lal and defendant No. 2 under the said will claimed to be the owner and landlord of shop No. 431 Karai Ganj, Rajban Bazar, Meerut Cantt. By the said suit the plaintiff challenged the will as being forged and fabricated and also on the ground that the property being H.U.F. property and Sri Musaddi Lal being only Karta of the family had no right to execute the will in respect of the said property. The main prayer made by the plaintiff was for declaring the will null and void by a decree of declaration. The plaintiff-appellant valued the suit at Rs. 10 lacs and paid Court fee Rs. 200.00 (payable under Article 17(iii) of Schedule-II of the Court Fees Act).

(3.) The defendants challenged the valuation of the suit and further disputed the sufficiency of the Court fee. Their claim was that Court fee payable was on the valuation of the property involved in view of the provisions contained under Section 7(IV-A) of the Court Fees Act as amended by U.P. Act No. XIX of 1938.