JABBAR PARRA Vs. RAMZAN BEG

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this casa a preliminary issue has been raised that the suit has not been correctly valued for purposes of jurisdiction. It is urged that according to the plaintiffs own showing in the plaint the jursidicational value has been assessed by him on the land revenue payable which comes to Rs. 1875 00 but in order to defeat the law lest the plaintiff may have to institute the suit in an inferior court he has also shown the valuation for purposes of jurisdiction as Rs. 40,000/ - the sale price of the disputed property without paying the requisite court fees. The point pleaded in that the suit being one for possession based on right of prior purchase, it is governed by the relevant rules on the subject and the matter is not to be left to the whim of the plaintiff.

(2.) THE following two preliminary issues have, therefore, been framed in the case : -

(3.) THE learned counsel for the defendant has vigorously contended that the plaintiff has himself shown the jurisdictional value of the suit as Rs 1875/ -. This he has assessed in accordance g with the Rules in force relating to the Court Fees Act and the Suits Valuation Act. But in order to defeat the suit being instituted in the court of lowest grade cometent to try it he has chosen to institute the suit in this court by showing that the sale price of the property involved was Rs. 40,000/ -. It is submitted that this is not warranted by law. It is the notional value fixed by the plaintiff in accordance with the relavant provisions of the Suit Valuation Act that would determine the jurisdictional value and not the sale price as shown in the sale deed that would confer jurisdiction on the court; It is, therefore, submitted that the plaint has been wrongly instituted in this court. Under Section 15 of the Code of Civil Procedure every suit is to be instituted in the lowest court competent to try it and therefore the plaint needs to be returned to the plaintiff for presenting it to the proper forum. Reliance is placed on AIR I960 Punjab 467 (FB) 83 Punjab Records 1912, III J&K Law Reports 28 As against this the learned counsel for the plaintiff has submitted that because a court cannot grant a pre emption decree for which possession on payment of a sum of money which exceeds the pecuniary limits of its jurisdiction, therefore, the suit was brought in this court regardless of the fact that the notional ualue for purpose of jurisdiction is assessed at Rs. 1875/ - only. In order to elucidate the argument further reliance is placed on order 20 Rule 14 CPC according to which there is to be a direction in the decree for deposit of money in a pre -emption suit. It is submitted that this is itself a part of the decree and when the amount is mentioned by virtue of such directions exceeds the pecuniary jurisdiction of the court then it has no power to pass a decree. Because in the instant case the sale price of the property involved has been shown Rs. 40,000/ - and if ultimately the court trying the suit comes to the conculsion that the sale was really affected for this amount alone then the High Court only is competent to pass the decree in the case It was with this object in view that the suit was instituted in this court. Reliance is placed on AIR 1926 Lahore (FB) and 16 Punjab Record 1909 page 73.