D. NAGARAJ Vs. A. DEVARAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner herein was the defendant in O.S.No.124/2007 filed by the revision petitioner for the relief of specific performance, based on an agreement for sale dated 24.09.2005. The plaintiff, namely the respondent herein had valued the relief sought for in the plaint at Rs.4,08,500/- and a further relief of injunction at Rs.1,000/- and paid court fee on the basis of the said valuation. He emerged successful in the trial before the trial court, as the suit was decreed as prayed for by a judgment and decree dated 19.01.2010.

(2.) As against the said decree of the trial court, the revision petitioner preferred an appeal in A.S.No.28/2010 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Tiruvallur. In the appeal, he valued the relief at Rs.4,08,500/- and paid a court fee of Rs.30,780/-. The appellate court took the appeal on file and while the appeal was thus pending before the appellate court, Court Fee Examiner of the High Court of Madras, conducted an inspection and found that the appeal was not properly valued with the result that a lesser amount than the court fee payable on the appeal had been paid.

(3.) Based on the check slip issued by the Court Fee Examiner, notices were served on the parties to the appeal and an enquiry was conducted by the learned appellate judge. After enquiry, the learned appellate judge held that the appeal should have been valued on par with the sale consideration quoted in the agreement for sale irrespective of the fact whether the relief of specific performance was claimed in respect of the entire part of the obligation of the defendant under the agreement or only the unfulfilled part of the obligation. Accordingly, the learned appellate judge held that the suit ought to have been valued at Rs.17,38,500/- and that the appeal therefrom filed by the revision petitioner also should have been valued at the same rate. Resultantly, the learned appellate judge directed the revision petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.99,750/- as the balance amount of court fee payable on the appeal memorandum. As against the said order of the learned appellate judge, the present revision has been filed.