Concessional court-fee valuation for female maintenance suits applies to cross-objections, not the higher general maintenance valuation.

Section 7(ii)(a) of the Court-Fees Act fixes the general valuation rule for suits relating to maintenance and periodic sums, but its proviso grants concessional valuation for suits for personal maintenance by females and minors. Proper grammatical and contextual construction shows that the words "by females and minors" qualify the class of suits, not the identity of the appellant or objector. A cross-objection does not lose the benefit of the proviso merely because it is filed by a party outside that class. The subject-matter in such proceedings is therefore to be valued at the amount claimed as payable for one year, with the separate fee applicable to any charge-related relief.

---

---

Issues: Whether, in a cross-objection against a decree in a suit for personal maintenance by a female, the proviso to Section 7(ii)(a) of the Court-Fees Act applies so that the subject-matter is to be valued at the amount claimed to be payable for one year, or whether the main clause requiring valuation at ten times that amount applies.

Analysis: Section 7(ii)(a) lays down the general rule for suits for maintenance and periodic sums, while the proviso carves out a concession for suits for personal maintenance by females and minors. Reading the proviso with the inclusive definition of "suit" in Section 2 does not justify mechanically substituting the entire appeal or cross-objection phrase into the proviso so as to shift the focus from the class of suits to the class of appellants. On the proper grammatical and contextual construction, the qualifying words "by females and minors" refer to the suits instituted by such persons and not to the person filing the appeal or cross-objection. The Legislature intended the concession to attach to that class of suits, and the artificial valuation fixed by the proviso must therefore govern the cross-objection as well.

Conclusion: The cross-objection was entitled to valuation under the proviso at the amount claimed to be payable for one year, not at ten times that amount.

Final Conclusion: The court-fee on the cross-objection was to be computed on a valuation of Rs. 480, together with the separate fee on the charge-related relief.

Ratio Decidendi: A proviso granting concessional valuation for suits for personal maintenance by females and minors applies according to the class of suit and is not displaced by the fact that a cross-objection or appeal is filed by a person outside that class.

---