AROCKIASAMY Vs. XAVIER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition has been filed by the third defendant in O.S.No.41 of 2004 on the file of the Sub-Court, Pudukkottai, aggrieved by the order of the Sub-Judge, Pudukkottai, in rejecting the memo filed in respect of the jurisdiction point raised by him.

(2.) The plaintiff, in O.S.No.41 of 2004, filed a suit for recovery of the possession of the suit property by the defendants and for damages for use and occupation. The case of the plaintiff is that the suit property was leased to the defendants and the lease expired on 31.12.2003. Despite notice given by the plaintiff to the defendants to vacate and hand over the possession, the defendants did not hand over the possession and therefore, filed the suit for recovery of possession and for damages for use and occupation. While valuing the suit, the plaintiff has taken into consideration the monthly rent of Rs.5,000/- and paid the Court fee under Section 43(2) of Tamil Nadu Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act and valued the suit property at Rs.60,000/- for the first relief. The plaintiff valued the second relief for damages for use and occupation at Rs.25,000/- per month and calculated a sum of Rs.50,000/- for two months and paid Court fee thereon. Thus, the plaintiff valued the total value at Rs.1,10,000/- and filed the suit before the Sub-Court, Pudukkottai.

(3.) The 3rd defendant/revision petitioner herein filed a memo stating that each relief is separate and distinct and the plaintiff has to pay only on the higher ground and therefore, Court fee is to be paid only for the sum of Rs.60,000/- and hence, the suit filed before the Sub-Court is not maintainable and this case ought to be transferred to the District Munsif Court. This memo was rejected by the lower Court, holding that as per the Tamil Nadu Court Fee and Suit valuation Act, the plaintiff valued the suit at Rs.1,10,000/- and the reliefs prayed for, are not alternative but distinct and separate relief and hence, the jurisdiction of the Court has to be ascertained by adding the valuation for each relief and therefore, the Sub-Court has jurisdiction to decide the same.