KRISHNAKUDVA Vs. GANAPATHY HEGDE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is preferred by the defendant in O. S. No. 126/ 2000 against the order dated 3rd November, 2001 rejecting I. A. No. IV filed by him for setting aside the order passed by the Court-below condoning the delay in payment of the deficit Court fee by the plaintiff.

(2.) THE defendant filed I. A. No. IV contending that the order passed by the Court-below suffers from improper exercise of jurisdiction since the Court had no jurisdiction to extend the time on 17-8-1999 for payment of the deficit Court-fee. The defendant contended that the acceptance of the deficit Court-fee by the Court is contrary to Order 7, Rule 11 (c) (d) of the Code of Civil procedure and therefore sought for rejection of the plaint filed by the plaintiff. The Court-below refused to exercise its jurisdiction under Order 7, Rule 11 C. P. C on the ground that the granting of time by the Court for the payment of deficit Court-fee was done on due exercise of the Court's discretion and, therefore, the said order does not call for any interference. Being aggrieved by the refusal of the Court-below to reject the plaint, the defendant-petitioner has come up in this revision.

(3.) I have heard Mr. G. Balakrishna Shastry, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri. C. R. Subramanya learned Counsel for respondent.