N.P.LALAN Vs. LAKSHMIDAS NARAYANA DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) O. S. No. 547 of 1969 before the Munsiff's Court, Cochin, was a suit for a perpetual injunction restraining the petitioner herein, the defendant in the suit, from executing the decree in O. S. No. 39 of 1965 on the file of the Sub Court, Cochin, and for other incidental reliefs. After the issues were framed, the Court fee Examiner detected that the court fee paid was not sufficient and observed that the suit fell under S.27(1)(ii) of the Kerala Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act The plaintiff's Advocate filed an objection stating that the plaintiff is not liable to pay any additional court fee. This matter was heard by the learned Munsiff in detail and an order was passed on 26th June, 1970, directing the plaintiff to pay additional court fee along with a statement under S.10.

(2.) As the matter stood thus, the petitioner learnt that this order passed by the learned Munsiff was reviewed by him without any notice to him. This alerted the defendant, who made enquiries in Court and was informed that a review petition was filed and the order passed on June 26, 1970, was reviewed. It is complained that the defendant's Advocate was not heard; nor was he given any notice. It is relevant to mention here that if additional court fee is to be paid as per the earlier order of the Munsiff, the plaint will have to be returned for presentation to the Sub-Court as the suit will be beyond the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Munsiff's Court. According to the defendant, it was to obviate this inconvenient position that the application for review was made by the plaintiff. The defendant has come up in revision against the order passed by the Munsiff in review.

(3.) The learned counsel for the respondent took a preliminary objection that the revision is not maintainable inasmuch as the question relating to court fee is one between the State and the plaintiff and the defendant has no voice in that matter and as such the order passed fixing court fee is not revisable under S.115, Civil Procedure Code at the instance of the defendant. In support of this contention several authorities were cited before me by the learned counsel for the respondent.