L . RATHANCHAND SARMA Vs. VINAYAKA EXPORTS & IMPORTS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is placed before me on the note by the Registry regarding maintainability of the claim of the counsel for the appellant that Court Fee payable in an appeal filed against an order rejecting the plaint cannot be the same Court Fee that would be payable if the suit has been disposed of on merits.

(2.) The appellant had paid Court Fee Rs. 5/- along with appeal and the Registry had raised an objection regarding the quantum of the Court Fee payable. The learned counsel for the appellant had made an endorsement claiming that since the Order challenged is only an order made in the application seeking rejection of the plaint it is incapable of valuation and therefore, the Court Fee of Rs. 5/- paid along with appeal is correct. The Registry has raised doubts regarding the claim of the counsel on the Court Fee payable. The appeal has been filed against an order rejecting the plaint in a suit for specific performance on the ground that it is barred by limitation.

(3.) An Application filed by the defendant seeking rejection of the plaint in IA.No.295 of 2012 was allowed by the Trial Court on 27.07.2012. While valuing the appeal in the Memorandum of grounds it is stated as follows: <FRM>JUDGEMENT_118_LAWS(MAD)8_2017_1.html</FRM>