AIR 2014 SUPREME COURT 1286 ::2014 AIR SCW 1345 ::2014 (2) AIR Kant HCR 189 ::2014 (2) AKR 189 ::(2014) 123 RevDec 490 ::(2014) 1 CLR 674 (SC) ::(2014) 1 WLC(SC)CVL 541 ::2014 (1) KLT SN 85 (SC) ::(2014) 3 RecCivR 951 ::(2014) 3 Sim LC 1448 ::(2014) 2 Scale 523 ::AIR 2014 SC (Civil) 973 ::(2014) 2 AllMR 928 (SC) ::(2014) 103 All LR 687 ::(2014) 2 ICC 375 ::(2014) 2 Mad LW 534 ::(2014) 3 AndhLD 79 ::2014 (2) KCCR SN 101 (SC) ::(2014) 136 AllIndCas 198 (SC) ::2014 (5) SCC 603

Supreme Court Of India

(From : Andhra Pradesh)

Hon'ble Judge(s): K. S. Radhakrishnan, Vikramajit Sen , JJ

Andhra Pradesh Court-fees and Suits Valuation Act (7 of 1956) , S.37— Valuation of suit - Expression - 'Value of property' - Cannot be substituted with expression 'market value of property' - Suit for cancellation of sale deed - Basis for court fee is sale consideration mentioned in sale deed - Not on basis of market value of property at presentation of suit. AIR 2010 AP 178, Overruled. S. 37 of the Act, which deals with the suits for cancellation of decrees etc. is not governed by other Sections of the Court Fees Act, such as S. 7 and other related provisions. If Section 37 is interpreted in the light of the expression 'save as otherwise provided' used in S. 7 of the Act, it becomes clear that the rule enshrined therein is a clear departure from the one contained in Section 7 read with Sections 24, 26, 28, 29, 34, 35, 42 and 45, which provide for payment of court fee on the market value of the property. In that context, it could be seen that S. 37 is stand alone provision, wherein the legislature has designedly not used the expression 'market value of the property'. S. 37 Act, therefore, contains a special rule for valuing the property for the purpose of court fee and jurisdiction and there is no reason why the expression 'value of the property' used in S. 37 be substituted with the expression 'market value of the property'. Thus, in a suit f....