In CS(OS) 172/2021- DEL HC- Once suit has been valued at certain value, ad valorem court fees has to be paid mandatorily on same valuation, rules Delhi HC
Justice Neena Bansal Krishna [22-08-2022]

Read Order: RAJINDER SINGH BHATIA v. MANJU BHATIA 

Tulip Kanth

New Delhi, August 23, 2022: In a matter pertaining to a partition dispute between siblings, the Delhi High Court has referred to Section 8 of the Suit Valuation Act,1887  r/w Section 7 of the Court Fee Act,1870 and ordered the plaintiff-brother to pay ad valorem court fee on the amount of Rs 2.5 crore on which he had valued his suit for the purpose of jurisdiction.

While considering an  application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, filed on behalf of the defendant for rejection of the plaint on account of payment of deficient court fees, the Bench of Justice Neena Bansal Krishna clarified that Section 8 of Suit Valuation Act puts an obligation on the plaintiff to value the suit for the purpose of court fee and jurisdiction identically except for the Exceptions provided in Section 7 paragraph 5, 6, 9, 10 Clause (d) of the Court Fee Act.

In this case, the plaintiff had filed a suit for Declaration, Permanent and Mandatory injunction for eviction of defendant and for recovery of Mesne Profits/ Damages on account of unauthorized occupation of the suit premises by the defendant. The basis of the claim was that the plaintiff and defendant are the real brother and sister. However, disputes arose between the parties and a suit was filed for partition. The suit was decreed in favour of the plaintiff on the basis of the settlement wherein the parties to the suit and the sisters had clearly stated that the plaintiff would be 100% owner of the suit property. 

The defendant had also promised to vacate the subject property. However, the defendant had failed to vacate the property and hence, the plaintiff filed a suit for Mandatory Injunctions for directing the defendant to remove herself and her belongings from the suit property aside from other reliefs. The plaintiff had valued his suit for the purpose of pecuniary jurisdiction at Rs.2.5 crore while the relief of permanent injunction and mandatory injunction at fixed Rs.500/- each and court fee has been paid accordingly.

The sole objection was that once the valuation of the suit had been done at Rs.2.5 crore for the purpose of jurisdiction, the court fee was liable to be paid on the same amount and the plaintiff couldnot have had a different valuation for payment of court fees.

Reaffirming the settled law that licensee or an unauthorized occupant can be asked to vacate the property by filing a suit for Mandatory injunction, the Bench opined that u/s 7(iv) (d) of the Court fees Act to obtain an injunction, the court fee is payable according to the amount at which the relief is sought to be valued in the plaint. 

According to the Bench, though it is in the discretion of the plaintiff to value his suit as per his bona fide belief and discretion, but once he has valued his suit in terms of Section 8 of the Suit Valuation Act, the court fee shall become payable on the same amount in terms of Section 7 of the Court Fees Act. The Bench also added, “Once the suit has been valued at a certain value, the advolerum court fees has to be paid mandatorily on the same valuation.”

Considering that the  plaintiff in the present case had valued his suit for the purpose of jurisdiction at Rs.2.5 crore while for the purpose of court fee has assessed each relief at Rs 500, the Bench held that while a suit for Mandatory injunction for seeking possession from a licensee or an unauthorized occupant is maintainable, but the plaintiff would be liable to pay ad valorem court fee on the amount of Rs 2.5 crore. The plaintiff has also been given one month for making good the deficient court fee.