M.S.LIBERHAN, J. - (1.) THE factual matrix is not in dispute. The plaintiff brought a suit for mandatory injunction, inter-alia contending that the respondent-defendant are the licenses and their licensees cancelled, they be restrained from using the portion of the property in their possession as licencees.
(2.) THE respondent-defendants took the objection that the suit is not properly valued for the purpose of Court fee and jurisdiction, inter-alia contending that in fact, they are the not the licensees. They are in possession of the property in dispute in their own rights. The suit for possession is only maintainable. Following issues was framed: "whether the suit has not been properly valued for the purpose of Court fee and jurisdiction?" It was treated as a preliminary issue.
(3.) THE trial Court after appreciation of evidence led by the parties, come to the conclusion:- The defendant-respondents are not the licensees and are in possession of the property in their own rights. Thus, the suit is in fact, for possession and consequently, the Court fee leviable on the suit is on basis of market value of the property which is assessed at Rs. 30,000/ -.;