V SIVA PRASAD Vs. A KURMINAIDU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition arises from the order in I.A.No.5 of 1997 in O.S. No. 374 of 1997 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Salur holding that the Court fee paid in the above suit is not correct and directing the revision petitioner-plaintiff and Respondent No.8 to pay the proper Court fee.

(2.) The facts giving rise to this C.R.P. are as follows:

(3.) The petition was resisted by the revision petitioner and respondent No.8. It is stated in the counter that the entire plaint schedule property is in the possession and enjoyment of the plaintiffs (revision petitioner and respondent No. 8) and hence they filed the above suit for permanent injunction. It is their case that in view of the relief sought for in the above suit they need not pay the Court-fee on the actual value of the plaint property and that the suit was numbered after the matter was considered exhaustively. It is lastly asserted that the Court-fee paid in the above suit is only based on the notional value but not on the actual value of the suit schedule schedule property and hence the above petition is not maintainable.