CH PAHLAD SINGH Vs. NIADAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a reference by the District Judge of Meerut. One Pahlad Singh instituted a suit under Section 33, Agriculturists Belief Act (Local Act 27 of 1934), against certain persons. The trial Court declared that a sum of Rs. 1830-2-0 was due from the plaintiff to the defendants; but the plaintiff was not satisfied with this decree and appealed to the District Judge praying that the amount found due from him to the defendants be reduced to Rs. 1031. The learned District Judge has referred the following question to this Court for determination: Whether in an appeal for reduction of the amount adjudicated by the trial Court in a suit under Section 33, Agriculturists Relief Act, to be due from the appellant to the respondent ad valorem court-fee should be charged on the amount by which reduction is sought, and if not, what is the court-fee chargeable?

(2.) A more or less similar matter came before the taxing Judge of this Court in First Appeal No. 234 of 1936. The learned Judge observed in his order dated 20th April 1936: ...It is not stated whether defendant has or has not paid the court-fee [i.e. on an application such as is referred to in Sub-section (2) of Section 33]. If the defendant has paid the court-fee, then the decree is in fact a simple money decree in favour of the defendant against the plaintiff. The plaintiff on appeal desires that that money decree should be reduced by one sum of Rs. 2000 and another sum of Rs. 590. In that case the plaintiff-appellant would have to pay ad valorem fees on these two amounts. If however the defendant has failed to pay the court-fee within the time specified, the decree of the Court below remains a mere declaratory decree and the Rs. 10 court-fee paid on the appeal is sufficient.

(3.) The learned Judge thereupon directed that an inquiry be made as to whether the defendant had or had not paid the necessary court-fee and so obtained a decree for money payable under Section 33(2). We do not know whether or not in the present case the defendants have applied for and obtained a decree for recovery of the sum of money which has been found due to them from the plaintiff. In the event of their having done so before the filing of this appeal, we are in agreement with the view expressed by the taxing Judge in the aforementioned order that the plaintiff will be required to pay ad valorem court- fees on the amount by which he wants the decree to be reduced. This fee will have to be determined in accordance with the provisions of the Court-fees Act.