SANT RAM AND ANOTHER Vs. NAND LALL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a first appeal by plaintiffs Sant Ram and Naurata Ram from the judgment and decree, dated 21 -9 -1950, of the District Judge at Patiala.

(2.) THE plaintiffs brought a suit against Nand Lal defendant for recovery of Rs. 10,277/15/ - on the foot of a bond, Ex. PA, dated 3rd Assauj 2008 Bk. The bond was for the amount of Rs. 7,500/ -, payable in annual instalments of Rs. 400/ - on 1st Besakh of each year. The first instalment was due on 1st Besakh, 2007 Bk.

(3.) THE plaintiffs have paid court -fee correctly with regard to the first two claims and as to the third claim they have paid a court -fee of Rs. 10/ -. There is a preliminary objection by the Learned Counsel for the defendant that in the third claim of the plaintiffs payment of the court -fee is not proper. He contends that according to Art. 1 of Sch. 1, Court -fees Act and S. 16 of that Act the plaintiffs should pay court -fee with regard to the third relief upon the difference between the value of the relief they claim to be entitled to and that granted by the decree appealed against, and in this behalf reliance is placed on - Lukhun Chunder v. Khoda Buksh',, 19 Cal 272 (A); - 'Gobind Lal v. Rao Baldeo Singh',, AIR 1914 Lah 390 (B); - 'Agha Sher Md. Khan Zamanuddin v. Haji Fazal Hahi Gurwara',, AIR 1936 Pesh 232 (C) and - 'Zainul Abdin v. Emperor',, AIR 1931 Pesh 30 (D).