SUMATHI HALDER Vs. SURAJ BAHADUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order (No. 3 of 22nd August, 2013) passed in Other Suit No. 106 of 2013. (Smti. Sumathi Haider v. Shri Suraj Bahadur) suffer from some infirmities. The learned Judge held that the suit was undervalued and refused to proceed with the hearing of the interim application, unless the deficit court fee, as determined by the order was paid. The sale agreement is dated 9th October, 2004. The consideration therein is Rs. 8,70,000/- The suit is for specific performance of this agreement. According to the learned Judge, court fee was payable on this consideration under section 7(x) of the Court Fees Act, 1870. Court fee of Rs. 3000/- had been paid valuing the suit at Rs. 1,70,000/-. Court fee was adjudged by the learned Judge to be Rs. 8250.50, the deficit being Rs. 5250.50. The Tsunami and earthquake that hit these islands on 26th December, 2004 not only caused untold damage to property but also reduced the valuation of the land in question, Mr. Jayapal submits.

(2.) By virtue of Regulation 8A of the Regulation dated 26th July, 1957, the plaintiff is entitled to value the suit using his/her best judgment. This provision, according to learned counsel is special to the islands and hence overrides the general rules specified in section 7 of the Court Fees Act, 1870.

(3.) On the other hand, it is true that section 7(x) of the Court Fees Act, 1870 stipulates that court fees in a suit for specific performance of a contract of sale should be paid according to the amount of consideration.