Vasireddi Veeramma vs Marupudi Butchaiah And Ors. on 17 November, 1926
In Rattayya v. Brahmayya (1925) 49 MLJ 309. it is clearly laid down that the word 'value' in Section 12 of the Civil Courts Act means market-value.
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4 (0.20 seconds)Documents citing
Chelasani Rattayya vs Anne Brahmayya And Ors. on 5 February, 1925
Dhanabaggiammal vs Mari Ammal And Ors. on 29 March, 1932
The decision in Rattayya v. Brahmayya A.I.R. 1925 Mad.
Kattiya Pillai Alias Sernthaya Pillai ... vs Ramaswamia Pillai (Insane) By Wife And ... on 10 January, 1929
7. If this is the correct view on the question of Court-fee, how is the suit to be valued for the purpose of jurisdiction? It has been held that in such a case it is not open to the plaintiff to place an arbitrary value upon the relief he claims, but that he is bound to assess it, according to the market value of his interest in the properties in question. Venkatachalam Pillai v. Srini-vasa Aiyar (1923) 18 L.W. 399, Rattayya v. Brahmayya (1925) 49 M.L.J. 309 and Vasireddi Veeramma v. Butchayya (1926) I.L.R. 50 M. 646 : 52 M.L.J. 381. In this what is the value of the interest that would be lost to the plaintiff if the will is left outstanding? That would be the difference between the benefit he takes under the previous will relied on by him and the will he attacks in this suit. If this be so, it is not disputed that the value of the suit would be far in excess of the pecuniary jurisdiction of the District Munsif's Court. I therefore set aside the order of the Lower Court and direct the plaint to be sent to the District Munsif's Court for being returned by that Court to the plaintiff for presentation to the proper Court.
Rajammal vs S.N. Thyagaraja Ayyar And Anr. on 22 March, 1935
L R 489 : 10 L W 274 : 24 C W N 33 : 1 U P L R (P C) 43 (PC, Ratayya v. Brahmayya 91 Ind. Cas. 572 : A I R 1925 Mad.
1