THAKUR PRASAD SINGH Vs. JANKI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application in revision in a suit by the plaintiffs-petitioners filed against the defendants-opposite party for specific performance of a contract in part. The contract was executed by the defendants, agreeing to transfer 3.05 acres of land for a sum of Rs. 12,464 Coin Four sale deeds were executed in the defendants who had agreed to transfer the land in favour of the plaintiffs transferring 1.76 acres of land for a consideration of Rs. 7,364. The suit now is for enforcement of the remaining part of the con-tract namely to transfer 1.29 acres for consideration of Rs. 5,100 Court-fee has been paid on Rs. 5.100; but the learned Subordinate Judge has taken the view that the plaintiffs-petitioners are liable in pay ad valorem court-fee on the entire sum of Rs. 12.464 mentioned in the original contract. THIS view has been taken by him on the basis of a decision of the Madras High Court in G. Dullabho Sahu v. C. Adinarayana AIR 1937 Mad 831. In my opinion that case is clearly distinguishable. In effect the relief claimed in that suit was as pointed out at page 833, column 2. that the Court was requested to give effect to the arrangement which the plaintiff had entered into, but the plaintiff desired that in effecting the arrangement only the properties described in the schedules of the plaint should be conveyed and possession thereof should be given. The basis of the plaintiff's claim in that suit was the arrangement that It ad been arrived at between the plaintiff and defendants 1 and 2 and it was for the conveyance of the entire properties in schedule D of the plaint, no portion of which had been conveyed prior to the filing of the suit In that view of the matter it was held that the relief sought for could be given to the plaintiff of that suit only by enforcing that contract as a whole In the present case, however the contract has been partly performed and the suit is for specific performance of the rest On no principle can the plaintiffs petitioners be asked to pay ad valorem court-fee on the full consideration mentioned in the contract No relief is asked for in respect of the entire property covered by the contract.

(2.) I accordingly allow this application hold that the court-fee paid by the plaintiffs- petitioners is sufficient and set aside the order of the Court below. As no one has appeared to oppose this application there will he no order as to costs.