RAMASAMY Vs. JOTHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petition is preferred against the fair and decreetal order of the District Munsif Court, Perambalur, dtd. 30/6/2016 in I.A.No.572 of 2015 in O.S.No.483 of 2013.

(2.) The petitioners are the defendants 1, 3 &4 in O.S.No.483 of 2013. The respondents/plaintiffs have filed the above suit for the following reliefs:

(3.) While so, the revision petitioners/defendants have filed I.A.No.572 of 2015, in the above suit under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC for rejecting the plaint. In the said petition the revision petitioner/defendants would submit that the second relief sought in the plaint for declaring the settlement deed dtd. 3/9/2013 executed by the 1 st defendant in favour of the 4 th defendant as null and void. The above settlement deed executed by the 1 st defendant in respect of the said property is valued for Rs.6,45,000.00. Therefore, the value for such relief fixed by the plaintiffs/respondents at Rs.1000.00 is incorrect. It is submitted that when the document is sought to be cancelled, the Court fee ought to have been paid as per Sec. 40 of Tamil Nadu Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act, i.e., for the value of the property which is mentioned as Rs.6,45,000.00 as on 3/9/2013 and for which the Court fees ought to have been paid at Rs.48,750.00. It is further stated that the District Munsif Court, Perambalur has no jurisdiction to maintain the above suit, since the value of the suit properties are more than Rs.1,00,000.00 which exceeds the pecuniary jurisdiction of the above said Court. Therefore, the suit is liable to be rejected.