By S&S Co. Advocates & Solicitors · Published 3 August 2026 · Informational content, not legal advice
About this article: A general explainer prepared by S&S Co. Advocates & Solicitors on a recurring type of dispute. It does not report a specific judgment or order, names no parties and gives no case citation, so it should not be cited as authority. Law and practice change; please verify against the current statute and primary sources before relying on it.
The value placed on a civil suit decides two things: the court fee payable and the court that has pecuniary jurisdiction. Litigants often treat valuation as an administrative detail, but it can decide whether a case is heard in the right court at all. The rules differ by state, because court fees are governed by state Court Fees Acts, and the Suits Valuation Act, 1887 also applies in some respects.
In a suit for possession of immovable property, the valuation basis is fixed by the applicable Court Fees Act. Depending on the state and the kind of relief, it may be the market value of the property, a multiple of the revenue or a stated amount. A nominal or outdated figure chosen to reduce the fee or to reach a preferred court is not a safe approach.
If the valuation is found to be understated, the usual course is to require the plaintiff to correct it and pay the deficit court fee. Under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, a plaint can be rejected if the relief is undervalued and the plaintiff, after being asked to correct it within a time fixed by the court, fails to do so. A defendant can raise the objection, but courts generally prefer correction to dismissal.