ishdatt Tewari and anr. Vs. Tameshar Tewari and ors.

ishdatt Tewari and anr. vs Tameshar Tewari and ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Allahabad Decided Mar 20, 1923

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/485007

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/485007
Court: Allahabad
Judge: Piggott, J.
Decided On: Mar 20, 1923
Subject: Civil

Case Summary

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

Court Fees Act (VII of 1870), Schedule I, Article 1 - Cross-objections--Court-fees--Revenue paying land. - - I allow them one month within which to make good the deficiency.

Key legal issue: Civil

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

ishdatt Tewari and anr.

Respondent

Tameshar Tewari and ors.

Legal References

Reported In: AIR1924All175; 83Ind.Cas.780

Excerpt

court fees act (vii of 1870), schedule i, article 1 - cross-objections--court-fees--revenue paying land. - - i allow them one month within which to make good the deficiency.orderpiggott, j.1. i have considered the office report and the arguments of counsel. the cross-objections are admittedly liable to an ad valorem fee on the subject-matter in dispute this can only be ascertained by an examination of the decrees passed by the courts below the first court dismissed the plaintiff's suit: the lower appellate court gave the plaintiff ishdatt a decree be qadr jaedad maliyat mubligh rs. 100-10'. the defendants, in their petition of cross-objections, ask for the restoration of the first court's decree. i hold that the value of the subject-matter in dispute on their petition of cross-objections is rs. 100-10: they must pay an ad valorem fee on this amount. i allow them one month within which to make good the deficiency.

Full Judgment

ORDER

Piggott, J.

1. I have considered the Office Report and the arguments of Counsel. The cross-objections are admittedly liable to an ad valorem fee on the subject-matter in dispute This can only be ascertained by an examination of the decrees passed by the Courts below the First Court dismissed the plaintiff's suit: the lower Appellate Court gave the plaintiff Ishdatt a decree be qadr jaedad maliyat mubligh Rs. 100-10'. The defendants, in their petition of cross-objections, ask for the restoration of the First Court's decree. I hold that the value of the subject-matter in dispute on their petition of cross-objections is Rs. 100-10: they must pay an ad valorem fee on this amount. I allow them one month within which to make good the deficiency.

Same Parties ishdatt Tewari and anr. vs Tameshar Tewari and ors. Same Subject Civil Same Judge Piggott, J.

Civil