Mandatory Injunction Not ‘Consequential’ To Relief of Declaration, separate court Fee payable by plaintiff

In the matter of Bhagwanlal Sharma vs Government Kamla Nehru Kanya Uchchatar Mahavidalaya & Ors Misc Petition no. 2306 of 2023 decided on 24.01.2024 by The Hon’ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh

Facts: In the present matter a challenge was preferred against an order wherein the trial court held that in where a suit was filed with prayer for declaration and mandatory injunction court fee is payable on relief of injunction as well. It further held that mandatory injunction is not a consequential relief and therefore the Petitioner (Plaintiff) is liable to pay separate court fees.

Issue: Whether a relief of injunction in a suit for declaration be said as a consequential relief and no separate court fee is payable?

Observations: The Hon’ble High Court upheld the order of the trial Court. The Court placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in Sujata Sharma vs Manu Gupta 2010 SCC Online Del 1506, wherein the Delhi High Court held that a consequential relief to a declaration is dependant upon the declaration sought. In other words, there must be a relation and connection between the cause and the consequence. When granting a declaration, it must be seen by the court that whether a consequential relief naturally follows from the declaration. However, the mere fact that a consequential relief flows from the declaration will not make it automatic unless it is prayed as a consequence to the declaration. The Court further held that consequential relief falls in section 7(iv)(c) of the Court fee Act, 1870 and therefore Court fee is payable on ad-valorem basis as per the value of relief sought.

(DJ-02-2024)