Durga Prasad Vs. Swami Avidya Nand Guru Swami Hamarata Nand

Durga Prasad vs Swami Avidya Nand Guru Swami Hamarata Nand

Disposition Appeal dismissed Court Allahabad Decided Mar 12, 1958

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/461232

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/461232
Court: Allahabad High Court
Judge: V.D. Bhargava, J.
Decided On: Mar 12, 1958
Case Number: F.A.F.O. No. 336 of 1955
Subject: Civil
Disposition: Appeal dismissed

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Civil - Court Fees - Sections 7(i), 19 and Schedule I Article I of Court Fees Act, 1870 - whether Court fees payable in case of set off - held, Court fees payable. - - The defendant in the written statement alleged that the plaintiff failed to supply the stone ballast and, therefore, he suffered a loss of Rs.

Key legal issue: Civil
Outcome / disposition: Appeal dismissed
Acts & sections: Court-fees Act, 1870 - Sections 7 and 19 - Schedule - Article 1; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Order 8, Rule 6

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Durga Prasad

Advocate G. Kumar and ;N. Kumar, Advs.

Respondent

Swami Avidya Nand Guru Swami Hamarata Nand

Legal References

Acts: Court-fees Act, 1870 - Sections 7 and 19 - Schedule - Article 1; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Order 8, Rule 6
Reported In: AIR1958All574

Excerpt

civil - court fees - sections 7(i), 19 and schedule i article i of court fees act, 1870 - whether court fees payable in case of set off - held, court fees payable. - - the defendant in the written statement alleged that the plaintiff failed to supply the stone ballast and, therefore, he suffered a loss of rs.v.d. bhargava, j.1. this is an appeal under section 6a of the court-fees act.2. the plaintiff brought a suit for recovery of the price of stone ballast supplied to the defendant. the defendant in the written statement alleged that the plaintiff failed to supply the stone ballast and, therefore, he suffered a loss of rs. 13,459/3/-. he, therefore, claimed a set off. the court demanded court-fee on this set-off. the defendant objected to it. after hearing the parties the civil judge has asked the defendant to pay ad valorem court fee on rs. 13,459/-. against that order this appeal has been filed.3. it had been contended that by claiming these damages the defendant was actually not claiming his set off but was pleading adjustment. i do not think that this is case of adjustment or payment; but the present case is a case of set-off on the ground of damages suffered on account of non-supply of the stone ballast. if the claim by the plaintiff had been admitted and the amount due from the defendant to the plaintiff had been adjusted in this account, the matter would have been different. but the cause of action of the claim for damages being entirely different it is a clear case of set off covered by the bench decision of this court in ratan lal v. madari : air1950 all237 .4. learned counsel for the appellant relied on punjab electric power co., ltd. v. suraj kishan, air 1937 lah 62 (b). i do not think the facts of that case are similar to the facts of the present one and in my opinion the decision of the court below is correct. i see no force in this appeal; it is accordingly dismissed. in the circumstances of the case i make no order as to costs.5. the record of the case shall be sent backto the court below forthwith so that the case maybe decided as expeditiously as possible.

Full Judgment

V.D. Bhargava, J.

1. This is an appeal under Section 6A of the Court-fees Act.

2. The plaintiff brought a suit for recovery of the price of stone ballast supplied to the defendant. The defendant in the written statement alleged that the plaintiff failed to supply the stone ballast and, therefore, he suffered a loss of Rs. 13,459/3/-. He, therefore, claimed a set off. The court demanded court-fee on this set-off. The defendant objected to it. After hearing the parties the Civil Judge has asked the defendant to pay ad valorem court fee on Rs. 13,459/-. Against that order this appeal has been filed.

3. It had been contended that by claiming these damages the defendant was actually not claiming his set off but was pleading adjustment. I do not think that this is case of adjustment or payment; but the present case is a case of set-off on the ground of damages suffered on account of non-supply of the stone ballast. If the claim by the plaintiff had been admitted and the amount due from the defendant to the plaintiff had been adjusted in this account, the matter would have been different. But the cause of action of the claim for damages being entirely different it is a clear case of set off covered by the Bench decision of this Court in Ratan Lal v. Madari : AIR1950 All237 .

4. Learned counsel for the appellant relied on Punjab Electric Power Co., Ltd. v. Suraj Kishan, AIR 1937 Lah 62 (B). I do not think the facts of that case are similar to the facts of the present one and in my opinion the decision of the court below is correct. I see no force in this appeal; it is accordingly dismissed. In the circumstances of the case I make no order as to costs.

5. The record of the case shall be sent backto the court below forthwith so that the case maybe decided as expeditiously as possible.

Same Parties Durga Prasad vs Swami Avidya Nand Guru Swami Hamarata Nand Same Subject Civil Same Judge V.D. Bhargava, J. Acts & Sections Court-fees Act, 1870 - Sections 7 and 19 - Schedule - Article...

Civil