R. RAMAMURTHY Vs. T. LEELAVATHI AMMAL AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision petitioner is the defendant in O.S. No. 6034 of 2011 on the file of the learned XVI Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai. The respondents herein are the plaintiffs therein. The suit was filed for a declaration declaring that the respondents/plaintiffs are the owners of the suit schedule property by adverse possession and for permanent injunction.

(2.) WHILE so, the revision petitioner filed an application in I.A. No. 19920 of 2014 in O.S. No. 6034 of 2011 under Order VII Rule 11 C.P.C. for rejection of the plaint by raising so many grounds. But, when the matter was argued, ultimately, the revision petitioner confined his arguments only on two grounds as disclosed in the order dated 27.7.2015 made in I.A. No. 19920 of 2014 in O.S. No. 6034 of 2011. Those grounds are as follows: - -

(3.) THE second ground is relating to undervaluation of the suit. For the first prayer, the suit was valued under Section 25(b) of the Tamil Nadu Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act and a court fee of Rs. 22,500.50 was paid. As far as the second prayer is concerned, the suit was valued under Section 27(c) of the Tamil Nadu Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act and a Court of Fee of Rs. 75.50 was paid. The relevant passage from the order of the Trial Court is usefully extracted hereunder: - -