LAWS(KER)-2007-9-75

KARTHIKEYAN Vs. DAYASEELAN

Decided On September 20, 2007
KARTHIKEYAN Appellant
V/S
DAYASEELAN Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution the defendant challenges Ext.P2 findings of the learned Munsiff on issue "No. 2" regarding the propriety of the valuation of the suit and sufficiency of the court fees paid. Ext.Pl is a copy of the plaint. As rightly found by the learned Munsiff, the suit is liable to be valued under Section 28 of the Kerala Court Fees And suits Valuation Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). The suit is for a declaratory decree and the same is between trustees or rival claimants to the office of the trustee or between persons who has ceased to be trustees. Section 28 of the act is given below:

(2.) The learned Munsiff under the impugned order did notice that there is an averment in the plain to the effect that the trust property has a market value of more than 7 Lakhs Rupees. However on the reason that the maximum court fees payable on similar suits is only Rs. 200/- irrespective of the market value rejected in the averments in the plaint the learned Munsiff found the valuation and court fee to be correct.

(3.) I have heard the submissions of Sri. G. Sreekumar, the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri. M.K. Dilip Kumar the learned Counsel for the respondent. Drawing my attention to Section 28 of the Act and its proviso and also to the averments in Ext.Pl, Mr. Sreekumar submitted that though it may be true that the maximum court fees payable on like suits has already been paid by the respondent the learned Munsiff was bound to return the suit for presentation before the sub court, since the market value of the property was beyond the limits of the Munsiff's Court's pecuniary jurisdiction.