(1.) (Civil Revision Petitions are filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the common order passed in I.A.No: 186 of 2006 and O.S.No: 302 of 2005 dated 20.9.2006 by the learned District Munsif, Gobichettipalayam.) This CRP is filed by the defendant as against the dismissal of the I.A., filed by him under Order 7, Rule 11(c) CPC, to reject the plaint as proper court fee has not been paid as stipulated in the provision and the same has been paid after the period of limitation of the suit.
(2.) THE suit has been filed by the respondent/plaintiff for recovery of amount based on a promissory note allegedly executed by the petitioner/defendant. Pending the suit the defendant filed the I.A., stating that the suit is barred by limitation. According to him, the suit has been filed on 21.6.2005 and on the date of presentation of the plaint, the sit has been filed with insufficient stamp of Rs.100/= only. Hence the suit was returned on the next day i.e, 22.6.2002 for payment of proper court fee by granting two weeks time for re-presentation. On 14.9.2005 the plaint was represented along with an I.A.No:983 of 2005 dated 20.9.2005 to condone the delay of 69 days in representation of the plaint only. On that the deficit court fee was paid and the plaint was ordered to be numbered by the trial court. But no application has been filed seeking permission of the court to present the plaint with deficit court fee on 21.6.2005 since the deficit court fee of Rs.4663/= has been paid only on 14.9.2005 i.e,. beyond the period of limitation and therefore the plaint is liable to be dismissed.
(3.) IT is not in dispute that the suit has been filed on 21.6.2005 with the deficit court fee of Rs.100/= and the same was returned on 22.6.2005 by granting two weeks time to represent the plaint with proper court fees. But the plaint has been represented only on 14.9.2005 and deficit court fee was paid on the same date. On the said date of representation of the plaint, the plaintiff has taken out an Interlocutory Application under Section 151 CPC to condone the delay in representing the plaint. But admittedly, there is no petition filed under Section 149 CPC seeking extension of time for payment of deficit fee or to condone the delay in payment of such deficit court fee. Admittedly in the present case, the suit being filed on a promissory note dated 22.6.2002, the limitation expires on 22.6.2005 and hence the subsequent payment of court fee on 14.9.2005 without there being any specific relief claimed under Section 149 CPC, will not save the limitation and the suit cannot be revived.