SP REGUNATHAN AMBALAM Vs. PERIAKARUPAN AMBALAM AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S. No. 1 of 2007 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Sivagangai. He filed the suit for partition of his 1/2 share in the suit properties and for declaration that the sale deed dated 20.10.1976 is not valid. He has valued the suit for the purpose of Court fee at Rs. 15,100/- and he paid a sum of Rs. 1133/- under Section 40 of the Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act for the relief of declaration and paid Rs. 750/- under Section 37(2) of the Act valuing his share at Rs. 2,00,000/-. He filed an application under Order 6, Rule 17 CPC for amendment of the plaint to substitute the provision of the Court Fees Act under Section 25(d) instead of Section 40 and in the prayer portion, first prayer may be deleted and in the place, the prayer for declaration that the sale deed dated 20.10.1996 is not binding upon him and his rights to 1/2 share in the suit properties.

(2.) The amendment application is a pre-trial one. The Court below has returned the application without numbering by stating that as per the instructions of the District Judge, Sivagangai in his annual inspection notes of 2007, as mentioned in a copy of the communication issued by the Subordinate Judge, Sivagangai dated 15.04.2008 to the effect that at the time of his inspection that the plaint should be filed under Section 40 of the Court Fees Act to cancel the entire portion of the sale deed and deficit Court fee has to be calculated for the market value at the time of filing of the plaint.

(3.) The learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the above said communication is on an administrative notes which could not be considered in the place of judicial opinion and the petition may be numbered and orders be passed on merits.