IMPLICATION OF CLAUSE (XII) SECTION 7 OF COURT FEES ACT 1870

IMPLICATION OF CLAUSE (XII), SECTION 7 OF COURT FEES ACT, 1870 <!--[if gte mso 10]> IMPLICATION OF CLAUSE (XII), SECTION 7 OF COURT FEES ACT, 1870 By Ch. Muhammad Bashir, Advocate, Faisalabad Clause (xii) was added to section 7 of Court Fees Act, 1870 by the Court-Fee (Amendment) Ordinance, 1962, with effect from 7th June, 1962, which reads as under:-‑ "In suits not expressly provided for in this section, according to the value claimed, but such value shall not be less than a value which would attract a court-fee of less than fifteen rupees. " The said clause is intended to serve as a residuary provision to Clauses (i) to (xi) of section 7 to add an infinite kinds of suits to the suits covered by the said foregoing clauses, subject to discretionary power of suitors to value such suits, at an amount, not less than the amount as may attract a court-fee of fifteen rupees. The said minimal requirement of payment of court-fee of fifteen rupees has been rendered redundant by Punjab Notification No.253-80/248-St.1, dated 4-2-1980, issued under section 35 of the Court Fees Act, which remits court-fee on any Civil and Revenue suits the value of the subject-matter whereof, or of the relief claimed therein, does not exceed twenty-five thousand rupees, at all stages in all Courts, including Revenue Court. It will be pertinent to note that similar kind of discretion, as given in Clause (xii), has been given to the plaintiff in respect of suits covered by Clause (iv), without any compulsion to value, the suits at an amount which may attract a court-fee of fifteen rupees. In a way discretion given to plaintiff in the case of Clause (iv) is better than that given in the case of Clause (xii), as in the former case there is-no obligation on plaintiff to value the suit at such an amount as may attract a minimal court-fee of fifteen rupees. Previous to the addition of Clause (xii), Court Fees Act, had divided suits into two categories; one, entailing payment of ad valorem fees by reference to the value of the subject-matter in dispute at the rate prescribed in Column 3 of the First Schedule, and other, entailing payment of fixed fees, without regard to the value of the subject-matter, under the Second Schedule. The said division is made in Article 1 of the First Schedule, which is reproduced hereunder:-‑ "Plaint, Written Statement, Pleading set off or counter- claim---- (Not otherwise provided for in this Act) presented to any Civil or Revenue Court, except those mentioned in section 3. The words enclosed in bracket refer to the second category of suits, which fall under Articles 4, 5, 17, 21 and 22 of the said Schedule. Though it is not possible to numerise the suits which fall outside the ambit of both the said categories yet hereunder are detailed a few kinds of suits which fall under Clause (xii). (i) Suit for possession of property filed by a tenant against his licensee. It has been held in PLD 1967 Dacca 113 (Rehmat Ali v. M/s. Banares Silk Industries) that above kind of suit falls under Clause (xii) and not under Clause (v), as tenant himself holds a limited interests in the property. (ii) Suit for cancellation of document covered by section 39 of Specific Relief Act. Though in a chain of Rulings, including PLD 1969 Dacca 357 (Abdul Hamid v. Dr. Sadaque Ali Ahmad), 1982 CLC 9 (Rashid Abroad v. Haq Nawaz) 1993, CLC 1391 (Muhammad Riaz Aslam v. Muhammad Akhtar 2002 CLC 1549 (Mst. Parveen Akhtar v. Azhar Ali) it has been held that suit for cancellation of document is required to be valued according to the amount mentioned in it and ad valorem fee is to be paid but this view has been taken in ignorance of Clause (xii) and, as such, the said Rulings do not have. precedent value. (iii) Suit for simple declaration as to right to or title in property except suit falling under Clause (iv-A) of section 7. As there is no express provision in Clauses (i) to (xi) of section 7 regarding simple suit for declaration as to right to or title in property, apart from a declaratory suit covered by Clause (iv-A), so it falls under Clause (xii) and the plaintiff has discretion to value the suit as per requirement of that Clause. MR. JUSTICE MIAN SHAKIRULLAH JAN, JUDGE, SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN Mr. Justice Mian Shakirullah Jan graduated from Islamia College, Peshawar; Law Degree from the Khyber Law College, Peshawar University; joined the Bar in 1973; enrolled as an Advocate of the High Court in 1975 and as an Advocate of the Supreme Court in 1980; Member of the Executive Committee, Supreme Court Bar Association of Pakistan in 1993-94; Member of the Provincial Bar Council, N.-W.F.P., Peshawar for the period 1989 to 1993; Chairman of Free Legal Aid Committee of the Bar Council for 1990; Member of Enrolment Committee of Provincial Bar Council N.-W.F.P.; Member of Legal Education Committee of Pakistan Bar Council in 1990; Secretary General of Peshawar High Court Bar Association for the year 1987-88; Vice-President of Peshawar High Court Bar Association for the year 1986-87; Secretary of Peshawar High Court Bar Association for the year 1979-80 and 1984-85; Vice-President of Peshawar Bar Association for the year 1977-78; Visiting Speaker/Resource Person for various Law subjects in the Provincial Services Academy Peshawar, Federal Judicial Academy Islamabad, Frontier Law College, Peshawar and Islamia Law College, Peshawar; participated in the Shariah Course held by the Shariah Academy of International Islamic University; participated in the Study Tour to Saudi Arabia and Cairo (Egypt) under the auspices of Sharia Academy International Islamic University Islamabad in 1992; participated in the Fourth Seminar for Developing Bar Association at Long Island, New York, U.S.A.; participated in the 23rd Biennial Conference at New York, U.S.A., of International Bar Association as a representative of N.-W.F.P. Bar Council, 1990; participated in the Law-Asia Legal Aid Seminar "Legal Aid -- a Human Right or a Favour" held in New Delhi, India, as a representative of N.-W.P.P. Bar Council; Additional Advocate-General, N.-W.P.P. from July, 1993; elevated as an Additional Judge of Peshawar High Court on 13-12-1993 and then (confirmed) as Judge of the High Court in 1995, acted as Election Tribunal; Company Judge; Chairman of N.-W.F.P. Subordinate Judiciary Service Tribunal; Member Syndicate of the N-W.F.P. University of Engineering and Technology, Peshawar; Member of Syndicate of Hazara University N.-W.F.P.; Chairman of the Tribunal of the N.-W.F.P. Bar Council; appointed as Chief Justice of Peshawar High Court and took oath on 10th January, 2002. As Chief justice, remained Member of the Law and Justice Commission of Pakistan, National Judicial Policy Making Committee (NJPMC), Board of Governors Federal Judicial Academy and Board of Governors Access to Justice Development Fund. In this capacity too, lie contributed in the functions of these fora. Also visited United States of America and Switzerland and participated in various events on WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization), participated in the "U.K. Pakistan 2nd Judicial Conference on Child and Family Laws", presided over the Celebration of World Environment Day held at the Senate Hall University of Peshawar; presided over a follow up workshop for orientation of Environmental Magistrates of N.-W.F.P. appointed under, The Pakistan Environmental Protection Act, 1997. Was elevated as Judge of the Supreme Court of Pakistan and took oath of this august Court on 31-7-2004.