AJIT SINGH Vs. PUBLIC MOTOR SERVICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision application is directed against an order of the District Judge Jammu dated 26th April, 1961 overruling, the objection of the plaintiffs that the defendants appellants should pay ad valorem court fees on the decretal amount in appeal.

(2.) I have perused the order passed by the District Judge. He has relied on a Division Bench ruling of this Court Ahad Mir versus Mahda Bhat reported in A. I. R. 1960 Jammu and Kashmir 89 and has held that the defendants need not pay ad valorem court -fees on the decretal amount which they want to get rid of in appeal. The learned District Judge has not cared to read the ruling which he has cited in his judgment. Paragraph 12 of the aforesaid ruling deals with this point and it reads as under: -

(3.) IN Khem Raj versus Hem Raj and another, A. I. R. 1956 Jammu and Kashmir 35 this point has been clearly dealt with and it has been held that section 7 (iv) (f) the Court -fees Act applies to suits where the dispute relates to a right to taking of accounts and does not apply to appeals where a decree for a definite amount is prayed for or is challenged. When a plaintiff brings a suit for accounts he cannot know what the result of the accounts is likely to be and. therefore, under section 7 (iv) (f) he has a right to place his own value on the relief claimed but this right to place his own value on the relief is limited to cases where the relief sought is one for accounts. But an appeal arising from such a suit may not fall under Section 7 (iv) (f), Court -fees Act, There may be a final decree passed for a definite amount against one of the parties and the appeal from such a decree will not be governed by section 7 (iv) (f). There the appellant if he wants to get rid of the decretal amount will have to pay ad valorem court -fees. The dispute in appeal would no longer be of taking of accounts but would relate to a definite sum of money which is decreed against the appellant. The provision of the Court -fees Act applicable in such a case would be the 1st Article of the 1st Schedule of the Court -fees Act under which ad valorem court -fee on the decretal amount will have to be paid by the appellant as he wants the appellant Court to set aside that decree. In the present case the plaintiff had brought a suit for accounts and the trial Court after going through the accounts has found a certain amount due from the defendants. The defendants want to get rid of that decretal amount and to get the suit dismissed. Under these circumstances the court -fees payable by the defendants respondents will be ad valorem court -fees on the amount for which a decree has been passed against them. The lower appellate Court was therefore, in error in holding that the defendants will have to pay court -fees not on the decretal amount but on the value fixed by the plaintiffs For their relief in the Court of first instance. This revision application is accordingly allowed and the order of the lower appellate court is vacated. The case will be sent back to the lower appellate. Court with the direction that it will allow some time to the defendants respondents to make up the deficiency in court -fees and if they do so the appeal be heard and disposed of in accordance with law.