Deciding the Proper Court Fee: Section 11 of The Rajasthan Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961

Role of the Court in Fixing Fees

Prior to filing a case, the court is required to determine the appropriate court fee depending on the allegations set out in the plaint and the information furnished under Section 10. This determination can be re-examined and rectified if there are any errors. If a plaintiff has paid the wrong fee, the court may direct him or her to pay the right fee before the case can proceed.

For instance, when an individual brings a suit for property valued at ₹20 lakh but remits the fee required for a property valued at ₹10 lakh, the court will instruct him or her to deposit the right fee before it will accept the plaint.

Right of Defendant to Contest the Fee

The defendant may raise an objection if the defendant feels the suit has been inappropriately valued or that the court charge is inadequate. The court shall settle these objections prior to starting the main trial. If the court finds for the defendant, it shall give the plaintiff time to correct the valuation and settle the balance charge. If the plaintiff does not comply, the court shall reject the plaint and determine the costs of the case accordingly.

For instance, if a defendant contends that the case of business dispute has been valued at ₹5 lakh rather than ₹50 lakh to decrease the court fee, the court will scrutinize the contention and can direct the plaintiff to amend the valuation and pay the right fee.

For More Updates & Regular Notes Join Our Whats App Group (https://chat.whatsapp.com/DkucckgAEJbCtXwXr2yIt0) and Telegram Group ( https://t.me/legalmaestroeducators )

Recently Added Defendants and Their Right of Objection

If the new defendant is introduced into a case after the framing of the key issues by the court, they can also raise objections regarding valuation and court fee. The rule does not hold for defendants who are introduced to the case as legal representatives of a current party. The court will rule on such objections prior to entering evidence involving the new defendant.

For instance, if a firm is being sued and subsequently a director is joined as a defendant, the director can raise an argument that the case has been undervalued, and the court must rule on this matter before listening to their evidence.

Court of Appeal and Fee Corrections

Once the case is in the appellate court, the appellate court may also review the lower court’s ruling on court fees. This may be done automatically or upon a request by a party. If the appellate court determines that the lower court has imposed a lower fee than stipulated, then the liable party will be required to deposit the difference within a specified time.

If the appeal is in respect of a refused relief and the appellant is unable to deposit the deficit fee, the appeal will be struck out. But where the deficient fee concerns a relief already given by the lower court, the unpaid fee will be recovered as a revenue arrear of land. Where the appellate court establishes that an amount of excess fee was paid, it will direct refund to the party concerned.

For instance, if someone appeals a judgment in a dispute over property but does not remit the prescribed fee for appeal, their appeal can be struck out. However, if they had paid excess in the court below, they would be given a refund.

Jurisdiction and Suit Valuation Disputes

If a defendant raises an issue about the valuation of the case in order to object to the court’s jurisdiction, the court needs to clarify this point before commencing the hearing of the case. “Merits of the claim” implies essential issues of law such as prior rulings on the same question (res judicata) or if the case has been filed within time (limitation). Procedural aspects such as if the correct parties have been added to the case are not implied.

For instance, if a defence is that a case should be tried in a higher court as it pertains to a property worth ₹1 crore, the trial court will have to decide this issue before trying the case.

Section 11 ensures that the correct court fee is paid, avoids undervaluation of cases, and safeguards the rights of both plaintiffs and defendants. Through the resolution of court fee disputes at an early stage, it ensures fairness and efficiency in the legal process.