HARUN NATHARSHA Vs. SHEIK ABDUL KADER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Civil Revision Petition is filed against the fair and decreetal order passed in I.A. No. 124 of 2015 in O.S. No. 10 of 2015, on the file of Principal District Munsif Court, Thirunelveli, dated 21.07.2015. The revision petitioner is the defendant and the respondent is the plaintiff in O.S. No. 10 of 2015 on the file of Principal District Munsif Court, Thirunelveli. The revision petitioner filed I.A. No. 124 of 2015 in O.S. No. 10 of 2015, on the file of the Principal District Court, Thirunelveli, under Order 7 Rule 11(d) and Sec. 151 of CPC to reject the plaint.

(2.) According to the revision petitioner, Document No. 2 filed along with plaint is insufficiently stamped, as per Schedule I, Article 49(b) of Stamp Act. The respondent/plaintiff resisted the same and stated that whether the document is sufficiently stamped or not, it can be decided only at the time of marking documents, during trial. The learned Trial Judge has considered all the materials on record and the arguments of the learned counsels on either side and the Judgments relied on by them, dismissed the Interlocutory Application filed for rejecting the plaint. Against the said order, the revision petitioner, who is the defendant in O.S. No. 10 of 2015 has filed the present Civil Revision Petition.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner submitted that the learned Trial Judge failed to consider that as per Schedule I, Article 49(b) of the Stamp Act, Document No. 2 is insufficiently stamped and the respondent/plaintiff cannot rely on the said document and therefore, the suit is not maintainable.