Court Fees Act, 1870

Ajay Dabra filed suits for specific performance of two agreements for the sale of agricultural land in Himachal Pradesh, where the original seller had contracted with Himalayan Ski Village Pvt. Ltd., a non‑agriculturist. The sale was conditional on obtaining permission under Section 118 of the Himachal Pradesh Tenancy …

Suhrid Singh filed a suit seeking a declaration that certain sale deeds were void as they did not bind the co‑parcenary, along with joint possession and injunction relief. The trial court held that the suit sought cancellation of the deeds and required ad‑valorem court fee based on the sale consideration, a view affirm…

The appellants filed an eviction suit against the first respondent, claiming they were landlords and the respondent was a tenant in arrears of rent, and valued the suit on the basis of twelve months' rent. The respondent denied any landlord‑tenant relationship and argued that the suit required adjudication of title, th…

The appellant filed a criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, which the magistrate referred to a Lok Adalat for settlement. The parties reached a compromise and the Lok Adalat passed an award, but the respondent failed to honour the payment schedule, leading the appellant to file an exec…

Forasol, a French company, entered into a drilling contract with ONGC that required most payments in French Francs and 20% in Indian rupees at a fixed rate. After the rupee was devalued, Forasol claimed a higher conversion rate, which the arbitrator awarded without specifying a rate for the Franc portion. The Delhi Hig…

The State of Haryana acquired about 520 acres of land spread across 15 villages for an expressway under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Land Acquisition Officer fixed a uniform compensation rate of Rs.12,50,000 per acre, which was later enhanced by the Reference Court to Rs.43,17,841 per acre. Both the landowners a…

The appellant filed a suit for recovery of money in 1998 with a deficit court fee, seeking extensions under Sections 148, 151 and later Section 149 of the CPC because stamp fee papers were unavailable. The deficit fee was eventually paid and the court condoned a 272‑day delay in presenting the plaint. The respondents, …

Kamaleshwar Kishore Singh filed a partition suit valued at Rs 16 lakhs and paid a fixed court fee of Rs 29.25, assuming it was a simple partition case. Defendant No. 20 objected, leading the trial court to order payment of ad‑valorem court fee on 10% of the sale‑deed value of certain properties. The defendant later cla…

The appellant filed a civil suit after the testator's death seeking a declaration that a will dated 21‑03‑2003 and a sale deed dated 12‑01‑2005 were forged and should be declared null and void, along with their cancellation. The suit property was valued at Rs 30,00,000, but the plaintiff paid a fixed court fee of Rs 20…

The appellant filed a civil suit for specific performance which was referred to mediation under Section 89 of the CPC and settled amicably; he sought a full refund of the court fees paid, but the trial court allowed only a 50% refund. He challenged this in a writ petition, arguing that Section 16 of the Court Fees Act,…

Badlu, the father of Hakim Ali, filed a suit under Section 229‑B of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 seeking a declaration of bhumidari rights. The suit was dismissed, but the Additional Commissioner reversed the decision, leading the respondent to file a second appeal before the Board of Revenue…

The appeal concerned an award of a Permanent Lok Adalat (PLA) that had granted Canara Bank repayment of a loan from G S Jayarama without any recorded conciliation. The High Court had set aside the award, holding that the PLA lacked adjudicatory power and had bypassed mandatory conciliation steps. The Supreme Court exam…

The parties to a partition suit entered into a compromise that was recorded by a Lok Adalat on 7 July 2012, which under Section 21 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 is deemed a decree of a civil court. Plaintiffs 4‑6 later alleged that their signatures were obtained by fraud and filed writ petitions seeking t…

The Supreme Court considered two Special Leave Petitions filed by the High Court of Madras challenging its own order that granted a refund of court fees to M.C. Subramaniam, who had withdrawn appeal suits after reaching a private out‑of‑court settlement. The key issue was whether Section 69‑A of the Tamil Nadu Court Fe…

Black Pearl Hotels (Pvt) Ltd. entered into a "conducting agreement" with M/s Planet M Retail Ltd. and later sought arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The High Court Judge, invoking s.33(2)(b) of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957, referred the matter to the Registrar to determine whether the instr…

The plaintiff filed a suit for mandatory and prohibitory injunction, together with damages, to evict licensees from his plot. The defendant challenged the suit's pecuniary jurisdiction, arguing that the valuation should be based on the market value of the property (Rs. 1.8 crore) rather than the nominal amounts claimed…

The plaintiff, a former freedom fighter, sued the State of Punjab and its officers for Rs.20 lakhs in damages for denial of his freedom‑fighter status. He affixed only Rs.50 as court‑fees, relying on a Punjab & Haryana High Court decision that allowed tentative valuation for fee payment. The trial court ordered him to …

The plaintiff, Mrs. Vimal Duti, filed a suit for dissolution of partnership and for accounts, valuing the suit at Rs.25 lakhs for jurisdiction and Rs.500 for court fee. The defendants contended that the valuation for court fee was grossly undervalued and sought dismissal of the plaint under Order VII, Rule 11(b) of the…

The plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration and injunction and later amended the plaint, increasing the valuation and creating a deficiency in court fee. The trial court did not order a time limit for payment of the deficit fee. The defendants appealed; the first appellate court observed the lack of a time order and al…

The appellants owned property that had been requisitioned by the Government under the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952, and a compensation award of Rs.21,000 per month was fixed by an arbitrator, which the appellants contested. They appealed to the Madras High Court under section 11 of the…

The plaintiff, a former partner, sued his brothers for dissolution of a partnership and for accounts, alleging they had excluded him and falsified a partnership deed. He valued the suit at a nominal Rs.150 (Rs.50 each for declaration, accounts, and profit) and paid the corresponding court fee. The defendants contended …

The plaintiff, Smt. Prabha Jain, inherited a one‑third share of a plot that was illegally partitioned and sold by her brother-in‑law; the buyer later mortgaged the plot to Central Bank of India, which took possession under the SARFAESI Act. Jain filed a civil suit seeking declaration that the sale deed and mortgage dee…

Satheedevi owned a 9.98‑acre rubber plantation and had executed a power of attorney in favour of her daughter, who later sold the land to her husband by a registered sale deed. Satheedevi filed a suit for cancellation of that sale deed, stating the property value as Rs 7 lakhs and paying court fees accordingly. The tri…

The State of Uttar Pradesh appealed a decision of the Allahabad High Court which had ordered a refund of court fees under Section 13 of the Court Fees Act, 1870 after a case was remanded to the lower court under Order XI Rule 23 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 as amended by the High Court. The central question was…

The respondents filed a title suit for eviction of the appellant, claiming ownership and landlord status over a shop in Purulia. The appellant denied being a tenant, asserting that he entered possession under a sale agreement and later pleaded adverse possession, claiming over twelve years of possession. The trial cour…

The appellants filed a suit for specific performance but initially paid only a deficient court fee. After multiple representations and condonation of delay, the trial court allowed the deficit fee to be paid well beyond the limitation period. The second defendant, a pendente‑lite purchaser, was impleaded and challenged…

The dispute arose from a land acquisition notification where the original compensation award was Rs.24,033 per bigha. The respondents did not file an application under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, but later a reference was made and a Lok Adalat, under Section 20 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, p…