(1.) The petitioner is aggrieved by the order refusing to try the suit relating to Court-fees as a preliminary issue.
(2.) The respondent filed O.S. 130/98
(3.) Mr. Lakshmi Narayanan, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Court below erred in postponing the decision of the issues relating to Court-fees when Section 12(2) of the Court-fees Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act) makes it mandatory for the Court to decide this question immediately. He submitted that if the issue is decided, then, the Court will have no jurisdiction to try the suit and therefore Section 14(2) of the C.P.C. will apply which empowers the Court to dispose of the case on a preliminary issue when it relates to jurisdiction of the Court or bar of suit. He relied on the following judgments to support his case : (1) Meenakshisundaram Chettiar v. Venkatachalam Chettiar, AIR 1979 (2) Mad LJ 19; (2) I.T.C. Limited v. Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, (1998) 2 SCC 70 : (AIR 1998 SC 634); (3) Nemi Chand v. Edward Mills Co., AIR 1953 SC 28; (4) Raju Gramani v. Srinivasa Gramani, (1958) 1 Mad LJ 308.