D.Amsa vs T.Murali Dass
2023 Latest Caselaw 6695 Mad

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 6695 Mad
Judgement Date : 21 June, 2023

Madras High Court

D.Amsa vs T.Murali Dass on 21 June, 2023

                                                                              C.R.P.No.1876 of 2023

                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                   DATED: 21.06.2023

                                                        CORAM:

                                  THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE D.NAGARJUN

                                                 C.R.P.No.1876 of 2023

                     1.D.Amsa
                     2.S.K.Varathan                                               ..Petitioners
                                                          Vs.

                     1.T.Murali Dass
                     2.K.Jothi Ammal
                     3.Deenadayalan
                     4.Vedhachalam
                     5.Venugopal
                     ..Respondents


                     PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the
                     Constitution of India, praying to set aside the return order dated
                     25.04.2023 made in ASSR.No.137 of 2023 by the learned Principal Sub
                     Judge at Chengalpattu returning the Memorandum of Grounds of Appeal,
                     direct the learned Principal Sub Judge, Chengalpattu to number the
                     Appeal by allowing the Civil Revision Petition.

                                       For Petitioner    : Ms.S.Ruban Prabu



                     ---------------
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                     Page No.1/6
                                                                                     C.R.P.No.1876 of 2023

                                                         ORDER

This petition is filed questioning the return endorsement of the

learned appellate Court returning the appeal in AS.Sr.No.137 of 2023

dated 25.04.2023 on the file of Principal Sub Court, Chengalpattu.

2. The 1st respondent/ plaintiff had filed a suit for declaration of

title and perpetual injunction against the petitioners/ defendants 4 and 9

in the year 2011 in O.S.No.1 of 2011. The said suit came to be decreed

on 23.12.2022 and aggrieved by the same, the appellants being the

defendants preferred an appeal before the appellate Court viz., the

Principal Sub Court, Chengalpattu by paying the Court fee as the 1 st

respondent/ plaintiff paid in O.S.No.1 of 2011, when the plaint was

presented. However, the learned appellate Court has returned the said

appeal with the following endorsement:-

Perused records. This Appeal is filed challenging the Decree dated 23.12.2022 in O.S.No.1 of 2011 on the file of the DM. Cum JM Thirukazhukundram. As per Amended Court Fee Act Under Act 6/2017 value has to be arrived on the basis of Guideline Value, market value.

TNCF Act would mean the phrase “Court of first

---------------

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.2/6 C.R.P.No.1876 of 2023

instance” as only the Court which passed the decree and not the Court in which the suit was filed, so the valuation and Court Fee has to be computed and paid at that would be payable at the time of passing of Decree. Hence, the Registry of this Court is directed to return the Appeal for purpose of deficit Court Fee. Time One Month.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has taken this Court to

Explanation 5 of Section 52 of the Tamil Nadu Court Fees and Suits

Valuation Act, 1955, wherein, it is clearly mentioned that for determining

the Court fee payable, the market value shall be ascertained as on the date

of presentation of the plaint. If that is taken into consideration, the

observation made by the appellate Judge in returning the appeal that the

Court fee has to be paid as per the present market value is erroneous.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner also referred to the

judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Bomba Vs. Supreme

General Films Exchange Ltd., and others reported in AIR 1960 SC

980, wherein, it was held that the appellant had a vested right of appeal

---------------

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.3/6 C.R.P.No.1876 of 2023

when the proceedings were initiated and the right of appeal was governed

by the law as it stood then. It was further held that the amendment could

not be regarded as a mere alteration in procedure or an alteration

regulating the exercise of the right of appeal.

5. Taking into consideration the provision as mentioned above

in respect of the Amended Tamil Nadu Court Fees and Suits Valuation

Act, 1955, the learned appellate Court is directed to re-consider the

appeal and number the same, if it is otherwise in order and issue notice to

the respondents, in case, the respondents raise any objections in respect

of the Court fee and the same can be determined after giving opportunity

to both sides.

6. With the above observation, this Civil Revision Petition is

disposed of. No costs.



                                                                                      21.06.2023
                     dsa
                     Index             :Yes/No
                     Internet          :Yes/No
                     Neutral Citation  :Yes/No

Speaking order/Non-Speaking order

---------------

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.4/6 C.R.P.No.1876 of 2023

To:-

The Principal Sub Judge, Chengalpattu.

---------------

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.5/6 C.R.P.No.1876 of 2023

Dr.D.NAGARJUN, J.

dsa

C.R.P.No.1876 of 2023

21.06.2023

---------------