MELA RAM Vs. PRATIBHA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The case is at the stage of admission, and there is an office report that the court-fee paid is deficient. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and am of the opinion that the court-fee paid is deficient.

(2.) This was a suit for possession of a plot of land along with certain constructions put up thereon by the defendant and for recovery of Rs. 438 as mesne profits. On an objection raised in the trial Court by the defendant, the value of the property in suit was determined. It was found that the market- value of the land (which fell in the category of land described in Clause (d) of para (v) of Section 7 of the Court Fees Act) was Rs. 900 and that of the building Rs. 1,750. The plaintiff was therefore made to pay a court-fee on the total of these two figures and the said mesne profits, i.e. on Rs. 3,088 in all. The suit was decreed for possession of the land and for recovery of Rs. 146-2-0 as mesne profits, and the defendant was allowed to remove the superstructure. The defendant went up in appeal to the District Judge, but the appeal was dismissed and the judgment and decree of the trial Court were maintained. The defendant has now filed this second appeal.

(3.) The defendant-appellant has paid court-fee on Rs. 149-2-0 awarded to the plaintiff-respondent as mesne profits. He has also paid court-lee on Rs. 900, the market-value of the land in suit. He has thus paid court-fee on Rs. 1,046-2-0 in all. He however questions his liability for payment of court-fee on Rs. 1,750, the market-value of the building. Now, the determination of the question of the correct court-fee payable on a memorandum of appeal depends on an answer to the question: What 'is the subject-matter in dispute in the appeal? In other words, so far as the building in question is concerned, whether the defendant- appellant does, or does not, claim any, if so what, right in respect thereto, and whether that right is the same which was litigated in the trial Court, or different?