Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, original defendant No.1, challenged the valuation of the suit for the purpose of payment of court fees. The respondents, original plaintiffs, filed Suit No.1132 of 2009 seeking a declaration that a sale deed dated 10.3.2008 executed by them in favour of the defendant No.1 was illegal, null and void, and for consequential relief of possession, mesne profits, damages, and injunction. The plaintiffs valued the suit at Rs.200 for the declaration and injunction under Section 6(iv)(j) of the Bombay Court Fees Act, 1959, and separately valued the relief of mesne profits and damages. The defendant No.1 contended that the suit should be valued on the market value of the property and ad valorem court fees should be paid. The court held that where a sale deed is challenged as void ab initio, the plaintiff need not pay ad valorem court fees on the market value of the property, as the plaintiff does not seek cancellation of the instrument but a declaration that it is void. The court further held that the relief of mesne profits and damages can be valued separately and court fees paid accordingly. The court allowed the petition, setting aside the order of the trial court and directing the trial court to decide the issue of court fees afresh in accordance with law.
Headnote
A) Court Fees - Valuation of Suit - Declaration of Sale Deed as Void - Where a sale deed is challenged as void ab initio, the plaintiff is not required to pay ad valorem court fees on the market value of the property; the suit is properly valued under Section 6(iv)(j) of the Bombay Court Fees Act, 1959, read with Section 31 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, as the plaintiff does not seek cancellation of the instrument but a declaration that it is void. (Paras 1-10) B) Court Fees - Mesne Profits and Damages - Valuation - In a suit for declaration and possession, the plaintiff may value the relief of mesne profits and damages separately and pay court fees accordingly; the court fees on such relief are not required to be based on the market value of the property. (Paras 11-15) C) Court Fees - Injunction - Valuation - A suit for perpetual injunction is properly valued under Section 6(iv)(j) of the Bombay Court Fees Act, 1959, and the plaintiff is not required to pay ad valorem court fees on the market value of the property. (Paras 16-18)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the suit for declaration that a sale deed is void ab initio and for consequential relief of possession, mesne profits, and damages is properly valued for the purpose of court fees, and whether the plaintiff is required to pay ad valorem court fees on the market value of the property.
Final Decision
The court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the order of the trial court and directing the trial court to decide the issue of court fees afresh in accordance with law.
Law Points
- Court fees
- valuation of suit
- declaration of sale deed as void
- ad valorem court fees
- Bombay Court Fees Act
- 1959
- Section 6(iv)(j)
- Section 7
- Section 8
- Specific Relief Act
- 1963
- Section 31
- Section 34
- mesne profits
- damages
- injunction
