- (1.) Dr. Arnab Paul, Plaintiff- Respondent filed a Title Suit No. 67 of 2008 before learned Sub-Judge-I, Giridih, in which, the defendants pleaded in written statement that ad-valorem court fee has not been paid on the valuation of the disputed property because the respondent has filed a suit for declaration of the right, title, interest and possession and other consequential relief. The defendant also filed an application to that effect and trial Court has rejected the application and it was held that the suit is not for the possession for the land, houses and gardens and did not fall within Section 7(iv) of the Court Fees Act, rather the suit, which falls within Section 7(iv) (c) of the Court Fees Act and by virtue of Section 8 of the Suit Valuation Act. This plea was also taken by way of the written statement. The trial Court, while rejecting the application, held that parting with this order, the Court is mindful that the matter regarding the valuation of the suit can be decided by the trial Court after framing of the separate issue in the matter.
(2.) It is also well settled position of law that if any point regarding the Court fee and valuation of the suit is raised, the trial Court shall frame an issue regarding the valuation of the suit and Court fee of the suit alongwith the other issues and the said issues would be decided as preliminary issues. The trial Court has given a liberty to the parties to press to frame an issue and the trial Court would also frame the issue regarding the Court fee and valuation and it shall be decided as preliminary issues. The Court shall decide the said issue, without being influenced by the order of this Court.
(3.) Thus, this writ petition is disposed of, accordingly, with no order as to costs.;