SIRIKONDA SATYANARAYANA Vs. SIRIKONDA BABU RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision is filed against the rejection of plaint by the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad on the ground that the valuation adopted by the revision Petitioner is not proper. The suit was filed for cancellation of sale deed dated 09.03.2007 and consideration mentioned therein was only Rs. 2 lakhs. The office took an objection that the registration value was shown as Rs. 60 lakhs and payment of court fee is not correct. The revision Petitioner has relied on a decision Allam Venkateswara Reddy v. Golla Venkatanarayana, 1975 AIR(AP) 122, supporting his contention. The learned Senior Civil Judge did not accept the contention.

(2.) It is to be noted that a learned Division Bench of this Court in Lakshminagar Housing Welfare Association, rep. by their Secretary, Hyderabad v. Syed Sami @ Syed Samiuddin and Ors., 2010 5 ALT 96 (D.B) held that the court fee be computed on the market value of immovable property as on the date of filing of the suit and not on the face value for which the deed was executed. It was also held in the above judgment that the judgment Allam Venkateswara Reddy, 1975 AIR(AP) 122 is per incur am and relied on the judgment , Kalachala Kutumba Sastri v. Lakkaraju Bala Trripura Sundaramma, 1939 AIR(Mad) 462. The above Full Bench judgment has not agreed with the judgment of another Division Bench reported in Dantuluri Venkatanarasimha Raju v. Dantuluri Chandrayya, 1927 AIR(Mad) 825, which took the view that Section 7 (iv) (a) of the Court Fees Act,1870 did not contemplate the market value on the immovable property, which is the subject matter of challenging the decree or deed.

(3.) But, however, the learned Counsel for the revision Petitioner has relied on the decision Satheedevi v. Prasanna and Anr., 2010 5 SCC 622 where under it was held that the court fee is required to be computed on value of the property for which the document was executed, and not on the market value. Further, it was held in the above judgment that the judgment Allam Venkateswara Reddy, 1975 AIR(AP) 122 lay down the correct law. It is useful to refer to para.38 of the judgment as under: