DEVI MANDAL Vs. MOHAMMAD NAWAZIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the plaintiff of Title suit No. 211 of 1963 . That was instituted in the Court of the Munsif, First Court, Bhagalpur. He is aggrieved by the order of the Court below dated 13-7-1965 (sic) upon him to pay court-fee upon the (sic) ad valorem basis.

(2.) In substance, the suit is for a declaration that two sale deeds executed by the petitioner in favour of defendants 1 to 4 are void The relief portion of the plaint summarises the grounds upon which such a declaration has been sought, by the petitioner. One of the grounds put forward is that the written consent of the Collector was not obtained as contemplated by Section 49C read with Section 49B of the Bihar Tenancy Act. Another ground upon which such a declaration is sought is that the sale deeds were brought into existence under fraud, misrepresentation and collusion and no consideration had passed thereunder.

(3.) It is well settled that where a transaction is void ab initio, a suit for declaration to that effect can be instituted on payment of the fixed court-fee provided in Schedule II, Article 17 of the Court Fees Act. But where a transaction is not void ab initio, but is alleged to be vitiated on certain grounds, such as fraud, misrepresentation, undue influence, etc., a suit for declaring the transaction to be void is not covered by the provision as to fixed court-fee provided in the Court Fees Act. In such a suit, the court is called upon to make a declaration properly so called as distinguished from recording a mere finding, that the transaction is void and in respect of a suit for a declaration properly so called, the plaintiff must pay court-fee on ad valorem basis.