Manoj Misra, J. - (1.) This is plaintiffs' petition against an order dated 20.11.2013 by which plaintiffs' application 441 Ga, seeking disposal of application 389 Ka to amend the plaint of Original Suit (in short O.S.) No.319 of 1982 for deleting property no.2 from schedule A of the plaint, has been rejected on the ground that, earlier, by order dated 05.07.2011, while deciding issue no.2, the plaintiff was required to make good the deficiency in court-fee therefore, any further action in the suit, unless the deficient court fee is deposited, would not be permissible in view of sub-sections (2) and (3) of section 6 of the Court Fees Act, 1870, as applicable in the State of Uttar Pradesh (in short Act, 1870). By the impugned order the trial court also fixed an outer time limit for making good the deficiency in court fee or else face rejection of the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11(c) of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short the Code).
(2.) Briefly stated the facts giving rise to this petition are that in O.S. No.319 of 1982, which was instituted by the petitioners, issue no.2 was framed as to whether the court fees paid by the plaintiffs was insufficient. The trial court vide order dated 05.07.2011 held that the court fee would be payable as per section 7(iv)(a) of the Act, 1870 and accordingly required the plaintiffs to pay deficient court fee within 7 days. The petitioners challenged the order dated 05.07.2011 before this court by filing FAFO No.2524 of 2011, under Section 6-A of the Act, 1870.
(3.) It is the case of the petitioners that during pendency of FAFO No.2524 of 2011 some compromise took place in respect of property mentioned at serial no.2 in Schedule A of the plaint therefore, on 15.10.2012, they filed application 389-Ka to delete property entered at serial no.2 from the said Schedule. And since they decided to pay deficient court fee on the remaining property, FAFO No.2524 of 2011 was withdrawn. Thereafter, upon withdrawal of FAFO No.2524 of 2011, they moved an application (391 Ga) before the court below to consider the amendment application 389-Ka.;