RADHAKRISHNAN Vs. TIJU THOMAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred against the judgment and decree in O.S.No. 78 of 2022 on the files of the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Pathanamthitta. Since the subject matter of the suit is Rs.15.00 lakhs, the Registry noted a defect as to whether the appeal is to be filed before this Court or the District Court. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted a reply as follows:

(2.) Sri.P.R.Venkatesh, the learned counsel for the appellant submitted that though the value of the subject matter of the suit is Rs.15.00 lakhs, on adding the pendente lite interest in terms of Explanation (3) to Sec. 52 of the Kerala Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1959, the total valuation would come to Rs.20,52,328.00 and the appeal will lie before this Court. Sri.Venkatesh relied on the decision of the Full Bench of this Court in George v. Bank of India [1992 (2) KLT 498].

(3.) The learned Amicus Curiae submitted that the valuation for jurisdiction and court fee need not be the same, and that pendente lite interest is considered only for computing the court fee and not for determining the forum of appeal. The learned Amicus Curiae relied on the decision in Ramanan v. Chitrasenan [ILR 2007 (1) Ker. 860] and the decision in Sivasankaran v. M/s. Sreekanth Enterprises [2024 KHC OnLine 7275]. In Ramanan's case (supra), the Division Bench, after examining the provisions of Sec. 13 of the Kerala Civil Courts Act, 1957 and Ss. 52 and 53 of the Kerala Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1959 held as follows: