Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1964 (8) TMI 96

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... dant, for occupation as tenant. 2. The plaintiffs had prayed for the reliefs: firstly, that it be declared that the allotment order passed by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer on 1-3-1960, which was confirmed on 25-7-1960, was void in law; and secondly, that the defendant be restrained by means of a permanent injunction from taking possession of the accommodation in question as a tenant on the basis of the allotment order referred to above. 3. The plaintiffs had, for purposes of jurisdiction, valued the suit at Rs. 600/-, the annual letting value of the bungalow, and for the first relief, paid the court fee as for a declaratory decree, and for the second, as for a relief for injunction. The second relief was not treated as a conse .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... relief and if such a relief is incapable of valuation, then the value of the immovable property computed in accordance with Sub-section (v), (v-A) or (v-B) of Section 7, as the case may be. However, as laid down in the second proviso the valuation can never be less than Rs. 300/-. When clause (a) of Section 7(iv) is read along with the first pro. viso, it shall be clear that in cases not covered by this proviso, it is open to the plaintiff to give his own value of the consequential relief though not less than Rs. 300/-, but where the relief sought is with reference to any immovable property and the relief is capable of valuation, court fee shall be payable on the value of the consequential relief subject to a minimum of Rs. 300/- and if .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n thereof can exercise his proprietary rights by letting the accommodation to tenants and collecting rent from them. An owner in occupation of the building enjoys not only the proprietary rights but also the right of occupation. A lessee including tenant also enjoys benefits arising out of the building. He has the right to occupy the building on payment of the lease money till the tenancy is determined by the lessor or lessee. When the lessee (tenant) enjoys certain rights in the building, he is a person who is in enjoyment of benefits arising out of the building and the tenancy right shall by itself be an immovable property . 7. This shall be apparent from the definition of 'lease of immovable property' as contained in Section .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... h the law, determine the tenancy. The period for which the bungalow shall remain in the occupation of the tenant is thus incapable of determination and for this reason the relief pertaining to tenancy right is incapable of valuation. Consequently, court fee for a declaratory decree or order with a consequential relief other than a relief specified in Sub-section (iv-A) of Section 7 of the Act, pertaining to tenancy right in an immovable property, shall be computed in accordance with Sub-section (v), (v-A) or (v-B) of section 7, as the case may be. As already mentioned above, tenancy right in an immovable property is itself an immovable property and the second part of the first proviso to Section 7(iv) shall, in case of the tenancy right, ha .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ct can, however, be made applicable, though not from a strictly legal point of view, as was done in AIR1949All560 (supra) and id a suit pertaining to tenancy right court fee shall be payable on the annual rent or annual letting value of the building. The Act was amended at many occasions since after the decision in the case of AIR1949All560 (Supra); and the legislature apparently did not consider it necessary to amend the law and to make a special provision for suits in which tenancy right in a building was in issue. The rule laid down in the above case can thus be applied to all similar cases, that is, to suits pertaining to tenancy right in building. 12. The fact that Satya Narain Pandey, defendant, had no agreement of tenancy with the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates