<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2002 (4) TMI 979 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275804</link>
    <description>A suit challenging sale deeds on grounds of fraud, misrepresentation and concealment, with a consequential injunction, was held to attract ad valorem court fee under section 7(iv)(c) of the Court-fees Act, 1870. The Court examined the real nature of the plaint rather than its drafting and found that cancellation or setting aside of the sale deeds was the substantive relief, not a merely declaratory claim with ancillary relief. Consequential relief under section 7(iv)(c) was treated as only an incidental remedy flowing from a declaration. On the pleadings, the plaintiff was therefore liable to pay ad valorem court fee on the sale consideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Apr 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2018 16:06:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=538677" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (4) TMI 979 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275804</link>
      <description>A suit challenging sale deeds on grounds of fraud, misrepresentation and concealment, with a consequential injunction, was held to attract ad valorem court fee under section 7(iv)(c) of the Court-fees Act, 1870. The Court examined the real nature of the plaint rather than its drafting and found that cancellation or setting aside of the sale deeds was the substantive relief, not a merely declaratory claim with ancillary relief. Consequential relief under section 7(iv)(c) was treated as only an incidental remedy flowing from a declaration. On the pleadings, the plaintiff was therefore liable to pay ad valorem court fee on the sale consideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Apr 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275804</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>