ANDHRA PRADESH Vs. GOVERNMENT OF AADHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this 'public interest writ' the subject of challenge is Rule 3 issued by the impugned G O Ms No 30 Home (Courts D) dated 2-2-1987, under Section 77 of the A P Court Fee and Suits Valuation Act of 1956 ('Act' for short). The said rule was impugned on the ground that it is ultra vires and offending against Art. 14 of the Constitution of India being arbitrary and unreasonable.

(2.) The rules framed under the said Act are called 'A P Court Fees and Suits Valuation Rules, 1987' (G O Ms No 30 Home (Courts-D) dated 2-2-1987). They are made in exerciseof the power conferred by Section 77 of the A P Court Fee and Suits Valuation Act, 1956 (Act 7 of 1956). Rule 3 reads thus: "Determination of Market Value: Based on the Basic Registers maintained by the Registration Authority. The Market value of land in suits falling under various sections of the Act shall be deemed to be the value of the immovable property both in Urban and Rural areas fixed by the Registration and Stamps Dept , keeping in view the value of the land nearby to or in the vicinity of the land which is the subject matter of the suit as recorded in the registers of the Sub-Registrar or the District Registrar concerned, as the case may be, during the course of regular transactions immediately before the plaint is filed. Provided a party filing a suit shall take a certificate in the Form prescribed containing the value of the said immovable property from the local Registering Officer and file it along with the suit".

(3.) The twin contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner are ; (1) That the market value of the land in suits to be filed as per Rule 3 shall be deemed to be the value of the immovable property as fixed by the Registration and Stamps Department which fore-closes the real value of the said property being established by the plaintiff or the defendant which was hitherto available for the parties to so establish; and that the market value which is now based on the "basic registers" maintained by the Registration Authority does not reflect the actual prevailing market value on the date when the plaint is actually filed into Court. Therefore, by virtue of deeming clause in this rule it fore-closes the establishment of true market value and thereby being repugnant to the very provisions of this Act and, therefore, it needs to be struck down as ultravires the Act. (2) The plaintiff before filing the suit shall have to take the certificate in the form prescribed contain, ing the value of the said immovable property from the local Registration Office so as to file it along with the plaint as per the proviso to the aforesaid Rule 3, making it thereby obligatory, which is highly onerous more so in the case of rustic litigant and in particular, who reaches the Advocates at the eleventh hour i e on the last date of limitation and being advised to obtain the said certificate finds it almost impossible to comply with the said rule and thereby renders the litigant impossible to sustain the cause of action. Hence, the proviso must be declared as arbitrary and unreasonable.