Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: the tamil nadu court fees and suits valuation act 1955 Page 1 of about 1,811 results (0.221 seconds)

Nov 16 2006 (HC)

O.S. Ramaswamy Vs. Personal Assistant (G) to the Collector of Madras S ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR2007Mad105; 2006(5)CTC541; (2007)1MLJ301

..... first respondent who directed the petitioner to amend the value. however, the petitioner maintained that the valuation given by him is correct and the valuation adopted by the officers of the department is not correct and refused to amend the valuation. 6. chapter vi of the tamil nadu court fees and suits valuation act,1955 deals with probates, letters of administration and certificates of administration. as per section 55, every application ..... customary method of calling for the report of the first respondent - district collector, for the valuation of the property was done. however, the first respondent issued a notice under section 59(1) of the tamil nadu court fees and suits valuation act,1955, (in short 't.n.c.f. & s.v. act') signed on 24.02.1992 and served on the petitioner on 27.02.1992, calling upon him to ..... for the grant of probate or letters of administration shall be accompanied by valuation of the estate in duplicate in the form set forth in part .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 03 2012 (SC)

A. Nawab John and ors. Vs. V.N. Subramaniyam

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... the payment of the deficit court fee.24. the law relating to the valuation of the suits and the payment of court fees in the state of tamil nadu is "the tamil nadu court fees and suits valuation act, 1955". by section 87 of the said act, two enactments known as the court fees act 1870 and the suits valuation act 1887 (which governed the field of the valuation of suits and payment of court fees) are repealed. prior to 1955 act of tamil nadu, the above mentioned two enactments. it ..... rs.13,31,663 00 ps. on which the plaintiff calculated that a court fee of rs.99,875 75 ps. is payable, under section 42 of the tamil nadu court fees and suits valuation act, 1955" (hereinafter referred to as the 'tamil nadu act' for the sake of convenience). the plaint was presented on 20 08 1998 with deficit court fee. only an amount of rs.2,000/- was paid. the plaint was returned ..... by the court on 24 08 1998 with various objections including the deficiency in the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 31 1984 (HC)

Kanni R. Krishna Iyer Vs. K.L. Krishnamachari and ors.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1985Mad346

..... fee of rs. 5/- already paid, should be paid on the plaint.2. schedule ..... issue. on the o. p. no. 85 of 1982 a court fee of rs. 5/- had been paid under sch. 11, art. 11 (k)(2) of the tamil nadu court-fees and suits valuation act, 1955. the contention of the contesting defendants is that one-half the scale of fees prescribed in art. 1 of schedule i of the tamil nadu court-fees and suits valuation act, 1955 on the market value of the estate less the ..... enabled to straightway contest the petition.4. the plaintiff contends that as per the proviso to art. ll,(k)(ii)(2) of sch. 11 of the tamil nadu court-fees and suits valuation act, 1955 one half the scale of fee prescribed in art. 1 of schedule i on the market value of the estate is payable, only if caveat is entered and since in this case ..... enter contest, the petition may contend that in view of the fact that there is no contest no enhanced court-fee is payable. but whenever there is contest, whether a caveat is entered or not, according to the provisions of the tamil nadu court-fees and suits valuation act 1955 enhanced court-fee is payable. the reasoning of paul j., that the proviso to subcl. (2) cl. (ii) is extended .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 04 2003 (HC)

George Thomas Vs. Smt. Srividya and the Tax Recovery Officer Iv(1)

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR2003Mad290; 2003(1)CTC705; (2003)1MLJ823

..... plaintiff to take care that the valuation of the suit is as per the provisions of the tamil nadu court fees and suits valuation act, 1955. in this case, from the materials we find that in a suit for recovery of possession, the proper court fee ought to have been paid is only under section 30 of the tamil nadu court fees and suits valuation act and such court fee shall be only on the basis ..... of the market value of the property. the direction for payment of the court fee is ..... 866 of 1994 is decreed in favour of the plaintiff with a direction to the plaintiff to value the relief under section 30 of the tamil nadu court fees and suits valuation act, 1955, and pay the deficit court fee within a period of six weeks from today. insofar as the claim of damages, no arguments were advanced by the learned counsel for defendant ..... while seeking a relief of recovery of possession of the property. the proper valuation must be on the basis of market value and the correct court fee to be paid is under section 30 of the tamil nadu court fees and suits valuation act, 1955. in the absence of proper valuation of the suit, the plaint ought to have been returned under order vii rule 10(1) .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 15 1980 (HC)

The Official Receiver, Coimbatore Vs. S.A. Ramaswami Gounder and ors.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1980Mad269

..... decisions was to restrict refund only to the above two cases besides cases covered by sections 13 to 16 of that act.10. we have to now find out as to what is the position under the tamil nadu court-fees and suits valuation act, 1955. this act makes provisions for refund of court-fee in some cases where refund was not admissible under sections 13 to 15 of the central ..... in point.11. mohan v. balaram, (1959) 1 mad lj 110, was a case which arose under the tamil nadu court-fees and suits valuation act, 1955. there an application for leave to appeal in forms pauperis was rejected and the party was directed to pay the court-fee within a specified time. the party made a part payment and applied for further time for payment of the balance ..... cases not falling within the specific provisions of sections 66 to 70. this court, even after the enactment of the tamil nadu court-fees and suits valuation act, 1955, has been taking the view that in cases not covered by sections 66 to 70, the court can issue a certificate to the effect that the court-fee affixed has not been utilised so as to enable the party to apply for ..... act. sections 66 to 70 deal with refund of court fee. sections 67 and 68 correspond to sections 13 and 15 of the central act. section, 70 seems to take note of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 09 2006 (SC)

Jagannath AmIn Vs. Seetharama (Dead) by Lrs. and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : (SCSuppl)2007(1)CHN39; JT2006(10)SC397; 2006(11)SCALE599; 2006AIRSCW6351; 2007(1)SCC694; 2007(2)KarLJ311; 2007(1)KCCR358

..... in neelavathi and ors. v. n. natarajan and ors. : [1980]2scr307 . in para 8 this court while considering the identical provision of the tamil nadu court fee and suits valuation act, 1955 stated as follows:8. section 37 of the tamil nadu court fees and suits valuation act relates to partition suits. section 37 provides as follows:37(1) in a suit for partition and separate possession of a share of joint family property or of property owned ..... , jointly or in common, by a plaintiff who has been excluded from possession of such property, fee shall be computed ..... of on dec. 2nd, 1988 by one of us. following the decision of supreme court in the case of neelavathi v. natarajan : [1980]2scr307 , concerning section 37 of the tamil nadu court fees and suits valuation act, which is in pari materia with section 35 of the act, it was held that in a partition suit, plaintiff or plaintiffs was only required to set out the joint family properties in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 08 2003 (HC)

P. Lalitha and S. Mahalakshmi Vs. Kalimuthu and ors.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (2003)3MLJ469

..... that the alienations are not binding on them, it is now stated that they are in joint possession of the property and a court fee of rs. 200/- is paid under section 37(2) of the tamil nadu court fees and suits valuation act, 1955. the defendants, who have obtained the sale and are in possession of the property, had been enjoying the same by making improvements ..... and are in possession of different parties. the plaintiffs, knowing fully well of this transfer and possession, had valued the suit under section 37(2) of the tamil nadu court fees and suits valuation act, 1955 by misusing the said provision only to defraud the court. the court below found that maruthi rao was never in possession of the properties after they had been auctioned. 23. we have ..... in the plaint and in the evidence, it has been rightly found by the trial court that the court fee ought to have been paid on the market value under section 37(1) of the tamil nadu court fees and suits valuation act, 1955. therefore, the finding and the conclusion of the court below in this regard is hereby confirmed. we also hold that consequent to our finding ..... in reference to item 2 and the sub-items in item 12 of the suit properties, though the 6th defendant was in possession and enjoyment .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 25 2011 (HC)

Shifa Housing (P) Ltd. and ors. Vs. Sankaranarayanan Swami

Court : Chennai

..... .11(2)/ho/720/2010 - in exercise of the powers conferred by section 73 of the tamil nadu court fees and suits valuation act, 1955 (tamil nadu act xiv of 1955), the government of tamil nadu hereby reduces to a maximum of rupees one hundred, the fee payable under the said act in respect of the suits filed by religious institutions for restoration of immovable properties and for declaration of title over the immovable ..... properties of temples under the control of the hindu religious and charitable endowments department. as per the said g.o., the court fees ..... 09.04.2010, which contemplates that the hindu religious and charitable endowments department is liable to pay only rs.100/- as a court fee, respectively. 2.the case of the respondent / trust herein, who has filed the suit for declaration is that the property to the extent of nearly 15.35 acres of land belongs to a trust stated to ..... when the lis is pending as to whether the temple is entitled to the property or not, the decision relating to the court fee cannot be decided before and the same has to be decided only along with the suit. certainly, we see force in the said argument raised by the learned senior counsel for the appellants / petitioners. while approving .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 01 2000 (HC)

Vasantha and ors. Vs. Smt. Kamalammal and anr.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR2000Mad279

..... of the parties have to be adjudicated independently.12. the relevant section that is applicable to the present case is section 37 of the tamil nadu court-fees and suits valuation act, 1955. section 37(1) of the act deals with the payment of court-fee in a suit for partition and separate possession by a plaintiff who has been excluded from possession of such property. whereas section 37(2) of the ..... balance share, namely. 82.502% and for rendition of accounts in respect of the said share.8. along with this application, the applicants/defendants paid the court-fee under sections 37(3) and 35 of tamil nadu court-fees and suits valuation act. 1955 (rs. 150 + rs. 750 = rs. 900).9. according to the learned senior counsel appearing for the applicants, if the respondents' share is divided in consonance with ..... the preliminary decree, automatically, the applicants/defendants share would remain divided, as they are entitled to the balance share, namely, 82.502% in the suit properties and underthose circumstances, itwill .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 31 2000 (HC)

Virudambal and 4 Others Vs. Kandasamy and 4 Others

Court : Chennai

Reported in : 2000(2)CTC263; (2000)IIMLJ287

..... subordinate judge, ariyalur, directing the plaintiffs to pay court-fees under section 37(1) of the tamil nadu court-fees and suits valuation act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'), they preferred the present revision before this court. petitioners 2 to 4 herein are daughters of the first petitioner. 5th petitioner is the grand-daughter of the first petitioner. they filed a suit for partition and separate possession of their 11/18th ..... share in the suit properties which are described in schedule ..... plaint cannot be understood as stating that the plaintiffs were not in possession.'after referring to section 37 (1) and (2) of the tamil nadu court fees and suits valuation act. their lordships have also concluded thus:-'it will be seen that the court- fee is payable under section 37(1) if the plaintiff is excluded from possession of the property. the plaintiffs who are sisters of the defendants .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //