Section No. 11 Of Suits Valuation Act 1887

(1) Introduction

Suit Valuation Act has provided provisions fo determination of suit valuation for purpose of court fee and for purpose of jurisdiction of court. This act consists of two parts. In its Part II, provisions have been provided about procedure when objection is taken on appeal or revision that suit or appeal was not properly valued for jurisdictional purposes. These provisions have been provided in Section No. 11 of this act.

(2) Section No. 11 Of Suits Valuation Act Following points are important for explanation of this section:

(i) Sub-section 1

(ii) Sub-section 2

(iii) Sub-section 3

(iv) Sub-section 4

Sub-section 1

Following points are important for explanation of this sub-section:

(a) Objection against over-valuation or undervaluation

(b) Suit for accounts

(c) Exceptions

(a) Objection Against Over-Valuation Or Undervaluation

If objection is that that court of first instance or lower appellate court, which had no jurisdiction with respect to some suit or appeal, exercised jurisdiction with respect this suit or appeal by reason of over-valuation or undervaluation of that suit or appeal, this objection should not be entertained by an appellate Court

(b) Suit For Accounts

In suit for accounts, determination of value for purposes of jurisdiction by court at any stage of trial should be final and conclusive and should not be liable to be contested in appeal or revision.

(c) Exceptions

Followings are exceptions to sub-section 1:

(c-i) Clause (a)

(c-ii) Clause (b)

(c-i) Clause (a)

This objection should be entertained when it was taken in court of first instance at or before the hearing at which issues were first framed and recorded or when it was taken in lower appellate court is memorandum of appeal to that court.

(c-ii) Clause (b)

This objection should be entertained when appellate court is satisfied that suit or appeal was over-valued or under-valued, and that over-valuation or under-valuation of suit or appeal had prejudicially affected disposal of suit or appeal on its merits. Here an important point is that court should be satisfied for reasons and these reasons should be recorded in writing.

(iii) Sub-section 2

If this objection was taken in that manner, which has been mentioned in clause (a) of sub-section (1), but appellate court is not satisfied about both those matters, which have been mentioned in clause (b) of that sub-section, and appellate court has before it those materials, which are necessary for determination of other grounds of appeal to itself, it should dispose of appeal as if there had been no defect of jurisdiction in court of first instance or lower appellate court.

 (iv) Sub-section 3

If this objection was taken in that manner, which has been mentioned in clause (a) of sub-section (1), and appellate court is satisfied about both those matters, which have been mentioned in clause (b) of that sub-section, and those materials, which are necessary for determination of other grounds of appeal to itself, are not before it, it should proceed to deal with appeal under those rules, which are applicable to court with respect to hearing of appeals; but if it remands suit or appeal or frames and refers issues for trial or requires additional evidence to be taken, it should direct its order to that court, which is competent to entertain suit or appeal.

(v) Sub-section 4

Provisions of this section with respect to an appellate court shall, so far as they can be made applicable, apply to that court, which exercises revisional jurisdiction under Section No. 115 of Code of Civil Procedure or other enactment for the time being in force.

(3) Conclusion

To conclude, it can be stated that objection against over-valuation or undervaluation can be raised in trial court or appellate court, but it should be raised at time of framing of issues or in memorandum of appeal. It reveals that it cannot be raised afterwards.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

B i l a l - T a h i r