PHANI BHUSAN ROY Vs. RATAN KRISHNA ROY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revisional application has been directed against the order of the Addl. District Judge, Hooghly, in Misc. Appeal No. 158 of 1970 affirming the order dated August 29, 1970, of the Munsif, First Court, at Arambagh, dist. Hooghly in T.S. No. 251 of 1959 directing return of the plaint for presentation of the same to a proper Court holding that the suit should be valued under Sec. 7(v) of the Court Fees Act and that the value of the suit property exceeded the jurisdiction of the Court.

(2.) The Petitioner, Phani Bhusan Ray, as Plaintiff filed the original suit against the opposite party, Ratan Krishna Ray for evicting the latter and recovering khas possession of the property. In short, the Petitioner's case is that one Madan was the owner of the suit lands. He died childless leaving his wife Rati Bala as his limited heir. She sold the property to the Defendant, Ratan, showing some non -existent legal necessities before the coming into effect of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. Rati Bala died on February 19, 1969. The Plaintiff's allegation is that, as there was no legal necessity for the sale of the lands by Rati Bala, a limited owner, after Rati Bala's death, the sale is not binding upon him being the next full male owner as a reversioner of Madan. After the death of Rati Bala, Ratan has been occupying the suit lands as a trespasser. The Plaintiff has prayed in the suit for a decree for khas possession by evicting the Defendant who is alleged to be a trespasser amongst other reliefs. The suit has been valued at Rs. 49.

(3.) In the trial Court, as question arose whether the Plaintiff could get a decree for recovery of possession of the suit lands without paying ad valorem court -fees according to the value of the property. The learned Munsif held that the value of the suit lands exceeded Rs. 5,000, the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Court and that the Plaintiff was to pay court -fees after valuation of the suit under Sec. 7(v) of the Court Fees Act.