Court fee valuation in rendition of accounts suits must be bona fide; arbitrary understatement can justify rejection of the plaint.

In a suit for rendition of accounts, a plaintiff may make only a tentative valuation for court fee purposes, and that valuation must be bona fide and reasonably supported by the pleadings and material on record. Where the plaintiff itself pleads substantial sales, infringement-related damages and an expectation that a large amount would be due on accounts, an understated valuation may be treated as arbitrary. On the facts stated, the court found the valuation of court fee unsupported and clearly understated, and held the plaint liable to rejection under Order VII Rule 11, while granting time to make good the court fee deficiency.

---

---

Issues: Whether the plaintiff's valuation of the relief for court fee purposes in a suit for rendition of accounts was arbitrary and whether the plaint was liable to be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Analysis: In a suit for accounts, the plaintiff is generally permitted to make a tentative valuation for court fee purposes under the Court Fees Act, but that valuation cannot be arbitrary. Where the pleadings and surrounding material provide a reasonable basis for assessment, the court may test whether the stated valuation is a bona fide and reasonable estimate. Here, the plaintiff itself pleaded very substantial worldwide sales, claimed infringement-related damages and accounts, and stated that on rendition of accounts an amount in excess of Rs. 50,00,000/- was expected to be due. On that basis, the valuation of Rs. 5,00,050/- for court fee purposes was found to be unsupported and clearly understated.

Conclusion: The court fee valuation was held to be arbitrary, and the plaint was held liable to rejection under Order VII Rule 11, with time granted to make good the deficiency in court fee.

---