W.P.15442.11 Writ Petition No. 15442 of 2011 10-11-2011 Shri Abhijit Bhowmik, learned counsel for the petitioner. Petitioner in a civil suit for declaration that the sale deed dated 28-05-2011 executed by respondent No. 1 in favour of respondent No. 2, 3 and 4 be declared null and void and a declaration that the agreement dated 19-02-2011 entered between the petitioner and respondent No. 1, wherein respondents No. 2 and 5 are the consenter, has been directed to pay ad-valorem court fees on the amount of Rs. One crore fifty lacs by order dated 03-05-2011 passed by first Additional District Judge, Khurai. Petitioner is aggrieved by the said order. It is urged that an agreement was entered into between the petitioner and respondent No. 1 for development of colony over the land bearing khasra No. 61/1 area 4.17 hectares, khasra No. 62/2 area 3.10 hectares, khasra No. 63/2 area 0.03 hectare and khasra No. 64/2 area 0.11 hectare of village Kuruwan, P.C. No. 52, Tahsil Bina. As per agreement (Annexure-P/3) Rs. One crore fifty lacs were to be paid to the petitioner from the sale of developed plots. The remaining amount thereafter was to be divided amongst party in the ratio of 60:40. The respondent No. 1, owner of property was paid in advance an amount of Rs 10 lacs vide Cheque No. 279182 dated 19-02-2011 of Rs. 4,79,000/-, cheque No. 279183 dated 15-03-2011 of Rs. 5,00,000/- W.P.15442.11 whereas Rs. 21,000/- was paid in cash when the agreement was executed. On coming to know about the execution of sale deeds in question and sensing the breach of agreement, petitioner after giving a legal notice filed a suit for declaring the respective sale deeds as null and void and for a declaration that the parties to the agreement dated 19-02-2011 are bound by its terms petitioner affixed fixed court fees of Rs. 2,000/- for declaration and Rs. 100/- for permanent injunction. Trial Court at the stage of registration of suit, by impugned order, directed the petitioner to affix ad-valorem court fees on Rs. One Crore fifty lacs being the value of the agreement and value the suit accordingly. Section 7 (iv) (c) of the Court fees Act, 1870 provides that the court fees payable to obtain a declaratory decree or order, where consequential relief is prayed would be on the amount stated for the purpose of valuation. In the case at hnd the petitioner values the suit for Rs.10,00,000/- (ten lacs), the amount said to be paid vide agreement dated 19-02-2011, and has affixed a fixed court fees on the assumption that bare declaration is sought. A suit for bare declaration are provided for by section 42 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 which states that “Notwithstanding anything contained in clause (e) of section 41, where a contract comprises an affirmative agreement to do a certain act, coupled with a negative agreement, express or implied, not to do a certain act, the circumstance that the W.P.15442.11 court is unable to compel specific performance of the affirmative agreement shall not preclude it from granting an injunction to perform the negative agreement: Provided that the plaintiff has not failed to perform the contract so far as it is binding on him.” Under this provision the declaration sought for must relate to the title to any legal character or to any right as to any property and the plaintiff must be unable to seek further relief than a mere declaration of title (See Charan Das and others v. Amir Khan and others : AIR 1921 PC 50). The present is not the suit for bare declaration, but the petitioner-plaintiff in substance is seeking performance of affirmative agreement dated 19-02-2011. The trial Court therefore justified directing the petitioner-plaintiff to affix ad-valorem court fees. The Courts, as per decision of Full Bench in Subhash Chand Jain v. The Chirman, M. P. Electricity Board : AIR 2001 MP 88, can intervene when there is an attempt to under value the plaint and the relief. There being no jurisdictional error, no interference is caused. Petition fails and is hereby dismissed. (SANJAY YADAV) JUDGE sc