AROKIASAMY Vs. PERIYANAGAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ANIM-adverting upon the order dated 16.3.2007 passed in C.M.A.No,6 of 2002 by the Principal District Court, Villupuram, reversing the judgement and decreer dated 12.10.2001 passed in O.A.No.114 of 1996 by the II Additional District Munsif, Ulundurpet, this revision petition is focussed.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to the filing of this revision petition, as stood exposited from the plaint, succinctly and precisely, pithily and briefly be set out thus: THE respondents 1 to 6 and two others, as plaintiffs, filed the suit O.S.No.114 of 1996 in the Court of District Munsif, Ulundurpet, seeking the following reliefs:

(3.) A bare perusal of Section 7(2)(g) of the Act would leave no doubt in the mind of the Court that when the reality is such that as on the date of filing of the suit, a particular property is used as house site, certainly incommensurate with the prevailing market value, the said property should be valued and accordingly Court fee should be paid. The learned District Judge was very much carried away by the District Munsif's placing reliance on Ex.B1-the Valuation Certificate given by the Sub-Registrar of documents concerned and commented upon it as though guideline value is different from market value. No doubt, guideline value is different from market value and there could be not quarrel over it.