UDAYANATH MOHAPATRA Vs. RAHAS PANDIANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS matter comes to ma as taxing Judge in pursuance of the order of the Bench which held that the Bench has no jurisdiction to deal with the question of deficit, relating to the appeal memorandum in the High Court. I proceed to deal with it treating the order of reference by the Registrar to the Bench as an order of reference to me as the taxing Judge by the taxing officer; the Registrar being also the taxing officer. The suit out of which this appeal arises was brought in the following circumstances as stated in the order of reference.

(2.) THE plaintiffs paid in the lower Courts ad valorem court -fee of Rs. 226 -4 -0 valuing the property at ten times the assessment of Rs. 22. 10 -0. This was accepted by the trial Court on a specific issue raised before it regarding the valuation and the sufficiency of the court -fee. The property in dispute is Government jerayoti land of the extent of 7.51 acres and the learned Registrar being of the opinion that the value was inadequate re -assessed the value of the subject -matter of the suit at us. 2082 that being the amount for which the decree -holder the husband of defendant I purchased the suit property at court auction as appears from the sale, certificate which has been marked as an exhibit in the case. The appellants contest this valuation and hence this reference.