https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288264 A declaratory suit asserting title and seeking a declaration that an earlier ex parte decree did not affect the plaintiff's rights was held not to fall within Section 7(iv-A) of the Court-Fees Act. The expression "decree for money or other property" was construed as a decree for recovery of money or property, not a declaration concerning title to property with market value. The Court also held that an ordinary judicial decree is not an "instrument securing money or other property" because it is only a record of adjudication. The suit was therefore treated as one for declaration alone, and the court-fee already paid was sufficient. en-us Tue, 26 Sep 1967 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 28 May 2020 16:30:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288264 A declaratory suit asserting title and seeking a declaration that an earlier ex parte decree did not affect the plaintiff's rights was held not to fall within Section 7(iv-A) of the Court-Fees Act. The expression "decree for money or other property" was construed as a decree for recovery of money or property, not a declaration concerning title to property with market value. The Court also held that an ordinary judicial decree is not an "instrument securing money or other property" because it is only a record of adjudication. The suit was therefore treated as one for declaration alone, and the court-fee already paid was sufficient. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 26 Sep 1967 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288264