Dr. Bimal Anjuman vs Aasra Foundation (Registered)

L.N. Mittal, J.—Defendant Dr. Bimal Anjuman has approached this Court by way of instant revision petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugning order dated 11.9.2012 Annexure P/5 passed by the trial court thereby dismissing application Annexure P/3 filed by defendant-petitioner for dismissal of the suit for want of proper court fee. Respondent-plaintiff (a registered Educational Institute) has filed suit against defendant-petitioner vide plaint Annexure P/1. Besides seeking relief of declaration, the plaintiff has also sought relief of mandatory injunction to the following effect:-

Mandatory injunction directing the defendant to deposit the amount equivalent to three months salary for the fulfillment of three months notice the remaining amount of security equivalent to one month salary after adjusting Rs. 12,600/- has been forfeited and further directing the defendant to pay the damages, losses and compensation to the tune of Rs. 2,00,000/- or any other amount which may be assessed by this Hon''ble Court during the course of evidence on account of compensation and losses suffered by the plaintiff and its students on the part of defendant, may kindly be passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant with costs.

Defendant in his application Annexure P/3 alleged that the plaintiff is required to pay ad valorem court fee on the amount claimed in the suit but has not paid the same and therefore, the suit is liable to dismissal.

Plaintiff by filing reply Annexure P/4 contested the application and pleaded that the amount of compensation is to be assessed by the court and court fee shall be paid accordingly after the amount is so assessed and presently the value of the suit has been tentatively assessed at Rs. 200/- and court fee has been paid accordingly.

Learned trial court vide impugned order Annexure P/5 disposed of the application Annexure P/3 filed by the defendant observing that the question regarding quantum of damages is required to be determined after recording of evidence and therefore, requisite issue is to be framed. Accordingly, the trial court framed issues arising from the pleadings of the parties including issue relating to sufficiency of court fee. Feeling aggrieved, the defendant has filed this revision petition to assail the said order Annexure P/5.

I have heard counsel for the parties and perused the case file.

Counsel for the parties reiterated their versions as noticed hereinbefore. I have carefully considered the matter. The plaintiff in the suit has claimed specific amount of Rs. 2 lacs as damages, besides amount equivalent to three months salary of the defendant-petitioner and also the remaining amount of security equivalent to one month salary after adjusting Rs. 12,600/-. Since the plaintiff has claimed specific amounts under different heads, the plaintiff is required to pay ad valorem court fee on the said amounts. Impugned order of the trial court is patently illegal and suffers from jurisdictional error because court fee is to be paid on the relief claimed in the plaint and not on the relief that may be granted by the court after adjudication of the suit. In the instant case, the plaintiff has claimed recovery of Rs. 2 lacs as damages and three months salary in lieu of resignation notice period and one month salary towards security after deducting Rs. 12,600/- already deducted from the salary of the plaintiff Consequently, the plaintiff has to pay ad valorem court fee on all the said amounts. As a necessary consequence of the discussion aforesaid, the instant revision petition is allowed. Impugned order Annexure P/5 is set aside. Application Annexure P/3 filed by defendant is allowed and the plaintiff is directed to specify the amount of salary for three months claimed by it in the suit as well as balance amount of security and to pay ad valorem court fee on the aforesaid amounts as well as on amount of Rs. 2 lacs claimed as damages in the suit. The plaintiff shall do the needful within two months from today failing which the plaint shall be liable to rejection due to non-payment of proper court fee.