Nand Lal and others vs Tulsi and others

Pritpal Singh, J.

The trial Court in a suit for possession by preemption passed an order on 16th of October, 1984, directing the plaintiffs to pay the courtfee on the market value of a garden which is a part of the property sought to be preempted. This order has been challenged by the plaintiffs in the instant revision petition.

On hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I find that there is no merit in this revision. Clause (v) of section 7 of the Courtfees Act, as applicable to Haryana, deals with the courtfee payable in suits for possession of lands, houses and gardens and reads as under :

"7. For possession of land, houses and gardens.

(v) in suits for the possession of land, houses and gardens, according to the value of the subjectmatter; and such value shall be deemed to be

(a) where the subjectmatter is land other than land situated within municipal limits or Abadi Deh whether under cultivation or not, according to the market value thereof which shall be deemed to be, ... ...

(b) where the subjectmatter is house, garden, or land situated within municipal limits or Abadi Deh whether under cultivation or not, according to its market value."

Clause (v) has been bifuracated into two parts. Subclause (a) relates to the Courtfee payable on the land which is situated outside the municipal limits or Abadi Deh. Subclause (b) deals with houses, gardens and lands situated within the municipal limits or Abadi Deh and according to this subclause the courtfee has to be paid on the market value. Evidently, sub clause (b) is applicable to the present case as the subjectmatter is a garden.

The learned petitioners'' counsel contended that the garden is admittedly situated outside the Abadi Deh, therefore, subclause (b) will not apply. There is no merit in this contention. So far as gardens and houses are concerned, subclause (b) alone will apply, whether they are within or outside the Abadi Deh. It is only the lands situated outside the municipal limits or Abadi Deh which are exempt from the provisions of subclause (b). Those lands are specifically covered by subclause (a) There is no mention of garden or house in this subclause. Plainly, therefore, the courtfee on a garden has to be paid under subclause (b) according to which the value of the property for purpose of courtfee is to be in accordance with its market value.

For the reasons mentioned above, the impugned order of the trial Court does not call for interference. Consequently, this revision is dismissed with costs.