LAWS(RAJ)-1979-9-6

HAZARI MAL Vs. MUTHA KAN RAM

Decided On September 24, 1979
HAZARI MAL Appellant
V/S
MUTHA KAN RAM Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition by the plaintiff is directed against the order dated December 13, 1976, by the Additional District Judge, Jalore, by which the learned Judge held that the court-fee paid by the plaintiff on the plaint on a valuation of Rs. 7,000/-, was insufficient and that he was liable to pay court fee on Rs. 25,000/ -. The main allegation contained in the plaint is that the defendants had unlawfully taken possession of the land in dispute and had raised unauthorised construction on it. It was prayed that the defendants may be directed to remove the unauthorised construction and hand over possession of the land to he plaintiff. The market value of the land was fixed at Rs. 4,000/-, on which the plaintiff paid the court-fee. Besides the relief for possession of the land, the plaintiff also prayed for award of mesne profits which he assessed at Rs. 7000/ -. I am not concerned here regarding the relief for mesne profits.

(2.) THE defendants raised an objection that the market value of the land was Rs. 10,000/-, and the value of the construction thereon was Rs. 15,000/ -. Thus, their plea was that the plaintiff was required to pay court-fee on Rs. 25,000/-, for possession of the land in suit. A preliminary issue on the point was framed by the trial court and its burden was placed on the defendants, who were called upon to prove that the valuation of the suit property was Rs. 25,000/ -. To prove this issue, the defendant examined D. W. 1 Durga Ram, D. W. 2 Kalu Ram, D. W. 3 Nathu Khan and D. W. 4 Sankal Chand. In rebuttal, plaintiff Hazari Mal examined himself. THE statements of D. W. 3 Nathu Kan and D. W. 4 Sankal Chand pertain to construction standing on the lard. As regards the value of the land, we have only the statement of Durga Ram and Kalu Ram from the side of the defendants and that of the plaintiff Hazari Mal on the other side.

(3.) LET the original record of the case be returned to the District Judge, Jalore, forthwith for proceeding according to law. .