PUKHRAJ Vs. KUNJI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this appeal preferred by the plaintiffs against the judgment and decree dt. 14.12.95 a preliminary objection was raised by the learned Counsel for the respondents that the appellants have not filed sufficient court fees. Because the question of sufficiency or otherwise of the court fees arose notice of the appeal was also given to the Govt. Advocate.

(2.) IT was pointed out by Mr. Maloo that the plaintiffs have challenged the decree dated 14.12.1995 passed in civil suit No. 206 S of 1995 which was valued at Rs. 1,51,20,000/ - but they have paid court fees of Rs. 43565 only. According to him the appeal should have been valued at Rs. 1 crore 51 lacs 20 thousand as was done in the suit and the same amount of court fees is liable to be paid in this appeal which was paid in the trial court. He invited my attention to the provisions of Section 15 and 40 of the Rajasthan Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961.

(3.) ON the other hand the contention of Mr. Chopra was that in this appeal the plaintiffs have challenged the decree mainly on the ground that the trial court has forgot to adjust a sum of Rs. 10 lac 70 thousand and the other matters are ancillary and, therefore, the valuation of appeal of Rs. 8 lacs 70 thousand is proper and adequate court fees has been paid. According to him, the plaintiffs had succeeded in the suit but only a rider was added in the decree that on failure to deposit of amount by the plaintiffs the suit shall stand dismissed and as the plaintiffs had already filed revision petition against the order denying the plaintiffs the extension of time they were not required to pay court fees on the entire amount. He tried to bring the case under Section 40(e) of the Raj. Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1961) read with Section 45 of that Act and submitted that at the most Rs. 300 can be demanded from him which he is prepared to pay.