- (1.) The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the objection about under-valuation of the suit could have been raised by means of an application and the learned trial Court was not justified in directing the defendant to take the objection about undervaluation of the suit in the written-statement. Learned counsel relied upon the decision of Jagat Narain, J., as he then was, in Moti Lal v. Jagdish Prasad Sharma, 1969 Raj LW 184 in support of his submission.
(2.) Section 11, of the Rajasthan Court-fees and Suits Valuation Act, which is relevant for the present purpose, runs as under :- "11. Decision as to proper fee.- (1) In every suit instituted in any Court, the Court shall, before ordering the plaint and on the materials and allegations contained in plaint and on the materials contained in the statement, if any, filed under section 10, the proper fee payable thereon, the decision being however subject to review, further review and correction in the manner specified in the succeeding subsections. (2) Any defendant may plead that the subject-matter of the suit has not been properly valued or that the fee paid is not sufficient. All questions arising on such pleas shall be heard and decided before the hearing of the suit as contemplated by Order XVIII in the First Schedule to the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Central Act 5 of 1908). If the Court decides that the subject-matter of the suit has not been properly valued or that the fee paid is not sufficient, the Court shall fix a date before which the plaint shall be amended in accordance with the Court's decision and the deficit fee shall be paid. If the plaint be not so amended or if the deficit fee be not paid within the time allowed, the plaint shall be rejected and the Court shall pass such order as it deems just regarding cost of the suit. (3) A defendant added after issues have been framed on the merits of the claim may, in the written statement filed by him, plead that the subject-matter of the suit has not been properly valued or that the fee paid is not sufficient. All questions arising on such pleas shall be heard and decided before evidence is recorded affecting defendant on the merits of the claim, and if the Court finds that the subject-matter of the suit has not been properly valued or that the fee paid is not sufficient, the Court shall follow the procedure laid down in subsection (2). Explanation. - Nothing in this sub-section shall apply to a defendant added as a successor or a representative in interest of a defendant who was on record before issues were framed on the merits of the claim and who had an opportunity to file a written statement pleading that the subject-matter of the suit was not properly valued or that the fee paid was not sufficient. XXX XXX XXX (5) All questions as to value for the purpose of determining the jurisdiction of courts arising on the written statement of a defendant shall be heard and decided before the hearing of the suit as contemplated by Order XVIII in the First Schedule to the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Central Act 5 of 1908). Explanation.- In this section, the expression "merits of the claim" refers to matters which arise for determination in the suit, not being matters relating to the frame of the suit, misjoinder of parties and causes of action, the jurisdiction of the Court to entertain or try the fee payable but inclusive of matters arising on pleas of res judicata, limitation and the like."
(3.) In Motilal's case 1969 Raj LW 184, the learned Judge made the following observations while interpreting the provisions of Section 11 :- "It is true that Court cannot proceed with the trial of the suit without being satisfied that the court-fee paid is sufficient. Section 11(1) lays down that the Court shall apply its mind to the question as to whether the court-fee paid is sufficient before the plaint is registered. This decision is subject to review, further review and correction, but only in the manner specified in the succeeding sub-sections. These sub-sections are sub-secs.(2) and (3). Sub-sec.(2) is applicable to the present defendant. It is open to a defendant before filing a written statement in reply to all the allegations in the plaint to take a plea that the suit has been under-valued and the court-fee paid is insufficient. In that case the Court would be bound to decide the question as to whether the suit has been properly valued. But once the written statement has been filed the only manner in which the plea can be taken is by amending the written statement. No amendment of the written statement has been sought on behalf of the applicants yet. As such the question of the suit being properly valued or not could not be determined by the trial Court. It is only after the applicants get their written statement amended that the question will be decided by the trial Court.";