CHELLAKANNU Vs. KOLANJI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Civil Revision Petition is preferred against the Fair and Decretal Order dated 14. 02. 2003 passed by the District Munsif, Jeyankondam in I. A. No. 396 of 2002 in O. S. No. 167 of 2002, allowing the Petition filed under Sec. 151, Order VII Rule 11 (b) C. P. C, directing the Plaintiff to pay the Court Fee under Sec. 40 of the Tamil Nadu Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act,1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ). The Plaintiff is the Revision Petitioner.

(2.) CASE of the Revision Petitioner is that the Suit Property belonged to his Father Pichamuthu. Pichamuthu had two wives, through whom he had Three Sons. Earlier, there was Partition in the family of the Plaintiff on 04. 08. 1971 wherein the Plaintiff and the Sons through the First Wife have partitioned the family properties. There was further partition between the Plaintiff and his Brothers in 1977. Item 1 of the Suit Property was allotted to one Poomalai. Items 2 and 4 S. Nos. 155/3 and 339/13a were allotted to the Plaintiff. First Defendant is the Wife of Shanmugam. Third Defendant has been keeping the First Defendant as his concubine. The Third Item was allotted to the Plaintiffs Sister. The Third Defendant is the Third Party. With the help of the First Defendant, the Third Defendant secured the Suit Properties Item Nos. 1 to 3 under a false representation that the Plaintiff is executing a Will in favour of the First Defendant. On that mis-representation, Plaintiffs thumb impression was obtained and two Sale Deeds dated 05. 06. 1995 and 23. 08. 1995 are said to have been obtained. Those Sale Deeds obtained from the Plaintiff under false representation is not binding on the Plaintiff. Hence, the Plaintiff has filed the Suit for Declaration that the Sale Deeds are not binding on him and for Permanent Injunction, restraining the Defendants from in any way interfering with the Plaintiffs peaceful possession and enjoyment of the Plaint Schedule Items I, II and IV.

(3.) DENYING the averments in the plaint, the Defendants have filed the Written Statement, stating that the Plaintiff has sold the Properties in Item No. 2 S. No. 55/3b under a Sale Deed dated 23. 08. 1995 for Rs. 27,500/ -. Item No. 2 was sold for the marriage expenses of the Plaintiffs Daughter Jayanthi. Plaintiff has received the Sale Consideration of Rs. 27,500/ -. Later, Item No. 2 was resold to the Fourth Defendant Jayanthi and she is in possession of Item No. 2. Likewise, Item Nos. 3 and 4 S. No. 55/4c and 339/13a were also sold for valid consideration under Sale Deed dated 05. 06. 1995 and 24. 01. 1999. All the Sale Deeds executed for valid consideration are valid and binding on the Plaintiff. The prayer seeking for declaration that the Sale Deeds are invalid amounts to cancellation of the Sale Deeds. Hence, the Court Fee paid under Sec. 25 (d) of the Act is not correct. The Court Fee ought to have been paid under Sec. 40 of the Act.