. Andhra Pradesh Civil Courts Act, 1972 — Section 17(1)(ii)(a) — Appellate Jurisdiction
The forum for appeal from a decree of the Senior Civil Judge's Court is governed by the amount or value of the subject matter of the suit or proceeding as originally instituted. Where the suit value is below Rs. 50,00,000/- (in this case, Rs. 43,50,000/-), the appeal lies to the District Court, notwithstanding any subsequent increase in the decretal amount.
2. Andhra Pradesh Court fees and Suits valuation Act, 1956 — Section 49, Explanation (3) — Valuation of Appeal vs. Valuation of Suit
Explanation (3) to Section 49 mandates that interest accrued during the pendency of the suit till the date of the decree is deemed part of the subject-matter of the appeal for the purpose of calculating the court fee payable. However, this inclusion of interest does not alter the basic valuation of the original suit and therefore does not shift the jurisdiction of the appellate forum as determined by Section 17 of the Civil Courts Act.
3. Procedure — Maintanability and Remittal
Where an appeal, correctly valued for court fee based on the decretal amount including interest (above Rs. 50 lakhs), is mistakenly filed before the High Court instead of the District Court (due to the original suit value being below Rs. 50 lakhs), the High Court should, in the interests of justice and considering the timely filing and correct court fee payment, remit the appeal to the concerned District Court rather than merely returning the memorandum of appeal.
* THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI
* THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y.LAKSHMANA RAO
+ APPEAL SUIT (SR) NO: 18100/2024
% 09.05.2025
# Maripalli Naga Lokeswara Rao.
…… Appellant
And:
$ Ravulapalli Kranthi Kumar
….Respondent
!Counsel for the appellant : Sri C.Venkaiah
^Counsel for the respondent : --
<Gist:
>Head Note:
? Cases referred:
2025:APHC:19916
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO
APPEAL SUIT (SR) NO: 18100/2024
ORDER: (per Ravi Nath Tilhari, J)
This appeal has been filed by the defendant in O.S.No.43 of 2021 on the
file of I Additional Senior Civil Judge’s Court, Vijayawada challenging the decree
dated 06.02.2024.
2. The office has raised objection that since O.S.No.43 of 2021 was from the
I Additional Senior Civil Judge’s Court, Vijayawada and the valuation of the suit
was below Rs.50 lakhs (i.e., 43,50,000/-). So, the appeal should have been filed
before the Court of learned District Judge, Krishna District.
3. The appellant raised objection to the office report. The objection and the
argument of learned counsel for the appellant is that the suit has been decreed
also for the interest @ 12% per annum from the date of suit i.e., 09.02.2021 till
the date of decree i.e., 06.02.2024 and further @ 6% per annum from the date of
decree till the date of realisation on the principal sum of Rs.30 lakhs and so
calculated the valuation of the appeal comes to Rs.54,62,000/-, which being
above Rs.50 lakhs. So the appeal would lie to the High Court.
4. Pursuant to the order dated 07.05.2025 on the aforesaid aspect, the office
has submitted the report.
5. We have perused the report.
2025:APHC:19916
6. As per the office report, the valuation of the appeal is Rs.54,62,000/-,
referring to Rule 49 (Explanation 3) of Andhra Pradesh Court fees and Suits
valuation Act, 1956.
7. We have considered the office objection and the submission of learned
counsel for the appellant on such objection.
8. The question is whether the appeal shall lie to the Court of District Judge
or to the High Court under Section 96 CPC? In other words the valuation of the
appeal or the valuation of the suit should govern the issue.
9. Admittedly, the valuation of the suit is valued by the plaintiff was less than
Rs.50 lakhs. The valuation of the present appeal is more than Rs.50 Lakhs,
which includes the interest awarded by the Court from the date of institution of
the suit till its realisation, in two parts i.e., till the date of decree @ 12% and from
the date of decree till its realisation @ 6%.
10. Section 17 of the Andhra Pradesh Civil Courts Act, 1972 reads as under:
“17. Appeals from the decrees and orders of Courts in the District:-
(1) An appeal shall, when it is allowed by law, lie from any decree or order in a civil
suit or proceeding:-
(i) of the District Court, to the High Court;
(ii) of the Court of Senior Civil Judge,-
(a) to the District Court, when the amount or value of the subject matter of the
suit or proceeding is [not more than rupees fifty lakhs,]
(b) to the High Court ; in other cases ; and
(iii) of the Court of Junior Civil Judge, to the District Court.
(2) The District Judge may, subject to the order of the High Court transfer for
disposal any appeal from the decree or order of a Court of Junior Civil Judge
preferred in the District Court, to any Court of Senior Civil Judge within the district.
2025:APHC:19916
(3) Where a Court of Senior Civil Judge is established in any district at a place
remote from the seat of the District Court, the High Court, may, with the previous
sanction of the Government, direct that an appeal from the decree or order of any
Court of Junior Civil Judge within the local limits of the jurisdiction of such Court of
Senior Civil Judge shall be preferred in the said Court of Senior Civil Judge .
Provided that the District Judge may, from time to time, transfer to his down Court,
any appeal so preferred, and dispose it of himself.”
11. As per Section 17(1)(ii)(a), the appeal, when it is allowed by law, shall lie
from any decree or order in a civil suit or proceeding of the Court of Senior Civil
Judge to the District Court, when the amount or value of the subject matter of the
suit or proceeding is not more than rupees Fifty lakhs and in other cases to the
High Court. We are of the view that the present case falls within clause (a), as
there is no dispute that the amount or value of the suit is Rs.43,50,000/- i.e., is
less than Rs.50 lakhs.
12. Section 49 of the Andhra Pradesh Court fees and Suits valuation Act,
1956, is reproduced as under:
“49. Appeals - The fee payable in an appeal shall be the same as the fee that
would be payable in the Court of first instance on the subject-matter of the appeal:
Provided that, in levying fee on a memorandum of appeal against a final decree
by a person whose appeal against the preliminary decree passed by the Court of
first instance or by the Court of appeal is pending, credit shall be given for the fee
paid by such person in the appeal against the preliminary decree.
Explanation (1) – Where the appeal is against the refusal of a relief or against the
grant of the relief, the fee payable in the appeal shall be the same as the fee that
would be payable on the relief in the Court of the first instance.
Explanation (2) – Costs shall not be deemed to form part of the subject – matter of
the appeal except where such costs form themselves the subject – matter of the
appeal or relief is claimed as regards costs on grounds additional to, or
independent of, the relief claimed regarding the main subject-matter in the suit.
2025:APHC:19916
Explanation (3) - In claims which include the award of interest subsequent to
the institution of the suit, the interest accrued during the pendency of the
suit till the date of decree shall be deemed to be part of the subject-matter of
the appeal except where such interest is relinquished.
Explanation (4) – Where the relief prayed for in the appeal is different from the
relief prayed for or refused in the Court of first instance, the fee payable in the
appeal shall be the fee that would be payable in the Court of first instance on the
relief prayed for in the appeal.
Explanation (5) – Where the market value of the subject-matter of the appeal has
to be ascertained for the purpose of computing or determining the fee payable,
such market value shall be ascertained as on the date of presentation of the
plaint.”
12. A bare perusal of Section 49 shows that the fee payable in an appeal shall be
the same as the fee that would be payable in the Court of first instance, on the
subject matter of the appeal. There is proviso as also added to section 49, but the
same is not relevant in the present case. Explanation 3 also provides that in
claims which include the award of interest subsequent to the institution of the suit,
the interest accrued during pendency of the suit till the date of decree, shall be
deemed to be part of the subject-matter of the appeal except where such interest
is relinquished. So as per explanation 3, it is clear that the interest granted from
the date of institution of the suit shall be deemed to the part of the subject matter
of the appeal, and the same shall not be the part of the subject matter or value of
the suit. So, the amount towards grant of inerest from the date of institution of the
suit, cannot be counted under Section 17 of the Andhra Pradesh Civil Courts Act,
1972, as it is not value or amount of the suit. The forum for appeal is to be
determined as per Section 17. The value or the amount of the subject matter of
the suit being less than Rs.50 lakhs (i.e., Rs.43,50,000/-) as in the appeal, the
2025:APHC:19916
present appeal, in this Court is not maintainable. The same should have been
filed in District Court.
13. Office objection is sustained.
14. Let office be taken necessary steps as per procedure.
15. It is made clear that so far as the payment of court fee is concerned, the
interest awarded by learned Trial Court from the date of institution of the suit at
onwards that would be calculated for the value of the appeal and the Court fee
would be payable on that amount. So far as the filing of the appeal is concerned,
the valuation of the suit shall be considered for the forum. Therefore, in the ends
of justice, as the appellant has already paid the court fee on the valuation of the
appeal and as also file the appeal within time of this Court instead of returning the
memo to be presented before the concerned District Court, we direct the Registry
to remit the present appeal to the District Court concerned with due notice to the
appellant.
___________________
RAVI NATH TILHARI,J
_______________________
DR.Y. LAKSHMANA RAO,J
Dated:09.05.2025
AG
2025:APHC:19916
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO
APPEAL SUIT (SR) NO: 18100/2024
Dated:09.05.2025
AG
2025:APHC:19916
