Home / Supreme Court / Diary 89/1956

S. Rm. Ar. S. Sp. SATHAPPA CHETTIAR v. S. Rm. Ar. Rm. RAMANATHAN CHETTIAR

Supreme Court of India | Diary 89/1956

Status

Judgment

Decided On

1957-11-28

Bench

BHAGWATI NATWARLAL H.,SINHA BHUVNESHWAR P.,IMAM SYED JAFFER,KAPUR J.L.,GAJENDRAGADKAR P.B.

Petitioner

S. Rm. Ar. S. Sp. SATHAPPA CHETTIAR

Respondent

S. Rm. Ar. Rm. RAMANATHAN CHETTIAR

Check another SC case

Full Judgment Text

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 10

PETITIONER: S. Rm. Ar. S. Sp. SATHAPPA CHETTIAR

Vs.

RESPONDENT: S. Rm. Ar. Rm. RAMANATHAN CHETTIAR

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 28/11/1957

BENCH: BOSE, VIVIAN BENCH: BOSE, VIVIAN DAS, SUDHI RANJAN (CJ) AIYYAR, T.L. VENKATARAMA DAS, S.K. SARKAR, A.K.

CITATION: 1958 AIR 228 1958 SCR 1015

ACT: Court fee, Computation of-Suit for enforcement of share in joint family Property-Plaintiff’s valuation of the claim -Value for purposes of jurisdiction, if must be the same- Court-Fees Act, 1870 (VII of 1870), s. 7 (IV) (b)-Suits Valuation Act, 1887 (VII of 1887), s. 8.

HEADNOTE: The computation of Court fees in suits falling under s. 7(IV) of the Court-Fees Act depends upon the valuation which the plaintiff in his option puts on his claim and once he exercises his option and values his claim, such value must also be the value for purposes of jurisdiction under s. 8 of the Suits Valuation Act. The value for purposes of Court fee, therefore, determines the value for purposes of jurisdiction in such a suit and not vice versa. 1022 Where, therefore, the Court finds that the case falls under s. 7(IV)(b) of the Court-Fees Act, and the plaintiff has omitted to specifically value his claim, liberty should ordinarily be given to him to amend his plaint and set out the amount at which he wants to value his claim. The value put for purposes of jurisdiction which cann...

Related

High Court Case Status

Check case status for High Courts across India