T NARSING RANI Vs. KISHEN RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner seeks a direction to the 6th respondent -- the 1st Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad to register the plaint O.S.S.R, No. 5477 of 1995 without insisting production of market value certificate from the registering authority for the purpose of payment of proper court-fee at the time of presenting the plaint.

(2.) The petitioner raises an important question before this Court that as per Rule 3 of A. P. Court-fee and Suits Valuation Rules, 1987 (for short "the Court-fee Rules"), insistence of market value certificate to be obtained from the local registering authority for the purpose of payment of proper court-fee at the time of presenting the suit in the Court, is causing lot of hardship to the parties who approach the Courts for obtaining necessary relief in time in the suits being filed by them.

(3.) It is the case of the petitioner that she presented a suit before the 1st Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad which is numbered as O.S. S.R. No. 5477/95. The 1st Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad -- the sixth respondent herein, is insisting the petitioner to obtain a market value certificate from the local registering authority as contemplated under Rule 3 of the Court-fee Rules for the purpose of correct court-fee to be paid by the petitioner along with the suit. It is stated that the petitioner has approached the competent authority i.e., the local registering authority requesting it to issue necessary market value certificate. However, it is stated, the registering authority is delaying in issuing the said certificate, with the result, the suit filed by the petitioner for urgent relief is being frustrated and therefore, he has approached this Court invoking Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to the sixth respondent to number the suit on the basis of the court-fee paid by the petitioner.