KURUPA NAIK Vs. BHAGABAN NAIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiffs in O. S. No. 41 of 1964 in the file of the Subordinate Judge cuttack have come up in Revision against thp order of the learned Subordinate judge dated 30-11-65 rejecting the plaintiff's prayer for amending of the plaint and directing them to pay court fee on the amount of Rs 4,816-00.

(2.) THE plaintiffs Nos. 1 to 4 as marfatdars of the deity plaintiff No. 5 brought the suit alleging that the defendants without having any manner of right to the suit scheduled properties valued at Rs. 4816-00 were threatening to interfere with the plaintiffs' possession over the same and praying that they may be restrained by a permanent injunction from interfering with the plaintiff? possession over the disputed properties The suit was valued at Rs. 100-00 for the purpose of court fee under Section 7 (iv) (d) of the Court Fees Act but for the purpose of jurisdiction it was valued at Rs. 4816-00. Accordingly ad valorem court fees on Rs. 100-00 were paid on the plaint. The learned Subordinate Judge after persusing the stamp report in the case directed the plaintiffs by his order dated 23-9-65 to pay court fee on Rs. 4816-00 at which amount the suit was valued for the purpose of jurisdiction. The plaintiffs thereupon filed an application for amendment of the plaint by substituting Rs. 100-00 for Rs. 4816-00 as the value for purpose of jurisdiction also. The learned Subordinate Judge by his order under revision has rejected the prayer.

(3.) THE suit being one to obtain injunction the relevant section applicable for payment of court fees is Section 7 (iv) (d) which provides that ad valorem court fee has to be paid on the amount at which the relief sought is valued in the plaint. It is not disputed that the relief sought has to be valued by the plaintiffs and the valuation of the property in respect of which the relief is sought is not material for the purpose. Section 8 of the Suits Valuation Act runs as follows: