034-NLR-NLR-V-61-S.-M.-MOHIDEEN-Petitioner-and-K.-V.-SUPPIAH-Respondent.pdf
154
Alohideen v. Suppiah
Present: Sansoni, J., and H. N. G. Fernando, J.
S. M. MOBXDEEN, Petitioner, and K. V. SUPPIAH, Respondent
8. C. 396—In the matter of an Application for Final Leave to Appeal tothe Privy Council in 8. C. 145 D. C. Kandy 4,422/MR.
Privy Council—Leave to appeal thereto—Subject-matter in dispute—Valuation for the
purpose of stamping—Relevancy of claim, in reconvention.
In an application for leave to appeal to tlie Privy Council, the value of thematter in dispute on the appeal, for the purpose of stamping, is to be ascer-tained from the point of view of the appellant, and is judged by the amounthe seeks to relieve himself from by appealing.
Plaintiff sued the defendant to recover a sum of Rs. 82,612*82. The defend-ant denied the claim, and claimed in reconvention a sum of Bs. 24,500. TheDistrict Judge gave the plaintiff judgment for Rs. 35,003- 66 and dismissed thedefendant’s claim in reconvention. On an appeal by the defendant the SupremeCourt reduced the amount awarded to the plaintiff to Rs. 30,176*33 and dis-missed the defendant’s claim in reconvention. The defendant thereupon soughtleave to appeal to the Privy Council.
Held, that the value of the matter in dispute for the purpose of stamping wasno more than Rs. 30,176* 33. In suih a case the value of the claim inreeonventionis not material.
■^k-PPLICATIOH for final leave to appeal to the Privy Council.
H. W. Jayewardene, Q.C., with D. R. P. GoonetiUeTce and C. P. Fernando,for the defendant-appellant, petitioner.
8. Sharvananda, with M. Shanmugalingam, for the plaintiff-respondent*
Cur. adv. vult~
SANS ONI, J.—Mohideen v. Suppiah
155
June 29, 1959. Saetsoni, J.—
We now give our reasons for the order made at the conclusion of thearguments.
The plaintiff sued the defendant to recover a sum of Rs. 82,612*82.The defendant denied the claim, and claimed in reconvention a sum ofRs. 24,500/-. The District Judge gave the plaintiff judgment forRs. 35,000*66 and dismissed the defendant’s claim in reconvention. Onan appeal by the defendant this Court reduced the amount awarded tothe plaintiff to Rs. 30,176*33 and dismissed the defendant's claim inreconvention.
The defendant now seeks final leave to appeal to the Privy Council,and the plaintiff objects on the ground that the applications for con-ditional leave and final leave and the other connected papers have beenunder-stamped. It is not denied that the original stamping of thesepapers was done on the basis that the matter in dispute in the appealwas Rs. 30,176*33. In view of the objection raised by the defendant,additional stamps were supplied on the basis that the matter in disputewas Rs. 82,612*82.
Now so far as the District Court and this Court are concerned anaction remains throughout in the class in which the pleadings placed it,unless an order of the Court at a relevant stage of the case puts it in ahigher or lower class. If there is an agreement entered into by theparties and formally recorded by the Judge, there is what is equivalent toan amendment of the pleadings, and it will have the same effect on thequestion of stamping—see Samynathan v. Atukorale1 and Little'sOriental Balm and Pharmaceutical, Ltd. v. Saibo 2. The stamping ofpleadings and documents is required to be done according to the valueof the action ascertained in this way. Another rule laid down inVellasamypulle v. The Uplands Tea Estates of Ceylon Ltd.3, which hasbeen consistently followed, is that all pleadings, documents etc., arestamped according to the class in which the claim in convention falls,unless the claim in reconvention is higher; in the latter event the classin which the claim in reconvention falls will govern the matter. Butthe class is never ascertained on the aggregate amount of both the claims.
Mr. Sharvananda for the defendant, basing himself on the argumentthat an appeal is a continuation of an action, at one stage submitted thatthe stamping in the matter of this application for leave to appeal to thePrivy Council should be according to the class in which the claim inconvention falls, vis. Rs. 82,612*82. At a later stage, as I understoodhim, he was prepared to concede that the amount of the judgmentsought to be appealed against might determine the class. In thatconnection he referred us to the well-known rule enunciated in Allan v.Pratt 4 that “ the judgment is to be looked at as it affects the interests ofthe party who is prejudiced by it, and who seeks to relieve himself fromit by appeal ”.
1 (1940) 41 N. L. R. 409.3 {1912) 1 C. A. G. 108.
3 (1938) 40 N L. R. 441.4 (1888) 13 A. O. 780,
156
SANSONI, J.—Mohideen v. Suppiah
I have no doubt that it is the value of the subject-matter in disputethat must govern the question of stamping. It is, in a case like this, thesum awarded in the judgment and not the sum claimed that determinesthat value. That was the decision in Allan v. Pratt1 which was thecase , of an appeal from a judgment awarding damages for personalinjuries. Following the principle laid down in that case the PrivyCouncil held in Meghji Lalchamshi and Brothers v. Furniture Workshop athat an appeal may sometimes lie where the plaintiff is the appellantalthough there could be no appeal by the defendant, or vice versa. Thevalue of the claim in convention or in reconvention has nothing to dowith the question of stamping at this stage.
What then is the value of the subject matter in dispute on the appealwhich the defendant seeks to take to the Privy Council ? Mr. Shar-vananda, falling back on the second position adopted in his argument,says it is R-s. 30,176• 33 plus Rs. 24,500/-. I am unable to agree. Ithiuk it is the former sum, for that is the amount which has been awardedagainst the defendant and it is the most that he can be ordered- to pay.If he succeeds in establishing any part of his claim in reconvention thismm of Rs. 30,176 • 33 will be reduced to that extent. But the judgmentwhich will ultimately be given, even if the defendant succeeds to thefullest extent possible, will not exceed Rs. 30,176'33. I cannot there-fore see why stamping on a higher value than this should be necessary.
I would hold that since the value of the matter in dispute on theappeal is to be ascertained from the point of view of .the appellant, andis judged by the amount he seeks to relieve himself from by appealing,the value for the purpose of stamping is no more than Rs. 30,176 -33.The defendant-petitioner is entitled to the costs of this application.
fra. the course of the argument the case of Pinencihamy v. Wilson 3 wasreferred to. The plaintiffs there valued the subject-matter at Rs. 500and the 1st defendant prayed for a dismissal of the action and claimeda sum of Rs. 500 in reconvention. It was held that the value of thesubject matter in the action was thereby enhanced to Rs. 1,000. Itwould seem that the attention of the learned Judges who decided thatappeal was not drawn to the case of VeUasamy Pulle v. Uplands TeaEstates of Ceylon Ltd. 4 and the later cases which followed it. We thinkthat this judgment may require consideration when the question arisesin an appropriate case.
H. N. G. Feenando, J.—I agree.
Application allowed.
1 (1888) 13 A. C. 780.
a (195i$) A. C. 80.
3 (1957) 59 N. L. B. 71.* (1912) 1C. A. C. 108.