AKBAR HUSAIN Vs. HARI RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts out of which the question raised in this appeal springs are as follows:

(2.) On the 29 of September 1906 the respondent instituted a suit in the Court of the Munsif of Amroha. He asked for a decree declaring his right of pre-emption over (1) a share of certain property which he described as muafi with zamindari in Thok Khurd; (2) a share of property described as muafi with zamindari together with a proportionate share of shamlat land in Patti Khwaja Bakhsh, Thok Kalan, and (3) all rights appertaining to the above-mentioned properties. For the purpose of determining the jurisdiction of the Court, he valued his claim at Rs. 800, which he said was the actual value of the property claimed by him, and he computed the fee payable under Act No. VII of 1870 in accordance with the provisions of Section 7, Clause (5), paragraph (c) of that Act. He stated the nett profits that had arisen from the land during the year next before the date of presenting his plaint as being Rs. 45; he multiplied this sum by fifteen and paid an ad valorem fee upon Rs. 675 as set out in Schedule I of the Act. The Munsarim, to whom the plaint was presented, certified that the court fee paid was sufficient, and that the suit had been instituted within the period allowed by the law of limitation of 1877. The plaint was thereupon admitted and registered on the 29 of September 1907.

(3.) One of the pleas taken in the written statement was that the court fee paid was insufficient and that the suit was not cognizable by the Court. It was not stated by the defendant why or how the court fee paid was insufficient, nor was it stated what court fee was necessary under the provisions of Act No. VII of 1870.