Jalal Mohammed Ibrahim vs Kaka Mohamed Ghouse and Another

Ramachandra Iyer, Chief Justice

This is an appeal from the order of the VI Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Madras, returning a plaint for presentation to the proper Court on the ground that the valuation adopted by the plaintiff it not correct. The plaintiff, who is the appellant before us, sued for a declaration that the decree in C. S. No. 173 of 1950 on the file of this Court is void, as having been obtained by fraud. The valuation of the suit will be governed by S. 40 (2) of the Madras Court Fees Act of 1955. Under that section, the plaintiff could value the relief either at the market value of the property which forms the subject matter of the decree or at the amount of the decree, whichever is most favourable to him. The decree is for a sum of Rs. 57,876. The plaintiff put the value of the property at Rs. 32,760, adopting 20 years'' purchase as the basis of valuation. The valuation adopted by the plaintiff was contested by the first defendant. A Commissioner was appointed to value the property, and he submitted a report that the property would be worth Rs. 54,000. Evidence before the Court showed that the monthly income from the property, which is a lodging house, is Rs. 250. That would mean that the gross income for the year will be Rs. 3000. Out of this amount, a sum of Rs. 300 will have to be allowed for repairs. The tax payable on the property will be Rs. 400. The net income from the property will therefore be only Rs. 2300. The learned Assistant City Civil Judge, without making allowance for the outgoings, fixed the valuation at 20 times the annual income from the property, and, finding that it exceeded Rs. 50,000, returned the plaint for presentation to the proper Court. The market value of the property in the absence of better evidence can only be based on the net income received there-from. That, as we stated already, will be approximately Rs. 2300 per year. 20 times that amount will come to Rs. 46,000. That should be taken as the proper market value and the plaintiff will have to pay court-fee on this amount. It follows that the City Civil Court will have jurisdiction to entertain the suit. The order of the lower Court is set aside and it is directed to restore the plaint to its file and register the suit. The plaintiff will have four weeks'' time to pay the court-fee. There will be no order as to costs.