JAYAGOVINDHAN Vs. STAR SYNDICATE BABAS COMPLEX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is the plaintiff in O.S.No.2291/2012 on the file of the Principal Sub Judge, Thrissur, has preferred this Original Petition challenging Ext.P1 order, whereby the learned Sub Judge appointed a Commissioner to determine the actual market value of the property in view of the mandate under Section 7(3A) of the Kerala Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1959 (hereinafter 'Act' for short).

(2.) According to the petitioner, the suit property is an agricultural land and therefore, the suit valued under Section 7(2) of the Act by taking 10 times of annual gross profit of the suit property for payment of court fee under Section 25(b) of the Act is perfectly in order. Therefore, the court below went wrong in appointing an Advocate Commissioner to make local and other investigation as may be necessary to file a report under Section 19 of the Act after determining the actual market value of the land under Section 7(3A) of the Kerala Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act.

(3.) It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner further that though in an earlier writ petition - W.P(C).No.38368/2003, by judgment dated 06.10.2005, this Court confirmed the market value of the same property at Rs.45,000/- per cent for the purpose of valuation and payment of court fee, the learned counsel for the petitioner attempted to distinguish the nature of property as agricultural land in this matter.