Patherya, J. - (1.) This appeal has been filed from the judgment and decree dated 19th January, 2015 passed in Money Suit No.607 of 1999. The Court below allowed the reliefs sought in the suit filed. Judgment was passed in Money Suit No.607 of 1999 and the same was decreed on contest and the plaintiff was entitled to get a decree of Rs.4,81,147/- along with interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till realization of the amount. The appellant defendant no.2 was directed to pay the entire amount within sixty days and in failing to do so, the plaintiff respondent no.1 was entitled to execute the decree. Cost was also imposed on the appellant defendant.
(2.) Counsel for the appellant defendant no.2 submits that the cause of action allegedly arose in Money Suit No.607 of 1999 on account of goods sold and delivered. The plaintiff opposite party respondent was the seller and the appellant defendant was the purchaser. Although a sum of Rs.80,000/- was paid, the balance was sought by instituting the money suit number mentioned above, filed on 3rd July, 1999 and on the filing of the said plaint, deficit Court Fees of Rs.9990/- was to be filed. In spite thereof, the deficit Court Fees remained unpaid. An application in September, 2000 was also filed for extending the time to deposit the deficit Court Fees, but the said application was also rejected. In spite of such rejection made, prayer was made by a petition for filing the deficit Court Fees which was also allowed on 21st September, 2000. In spite of several extensions given, a sum of Rs.9190/- was filed by the plaintiff opposite party respondent on 31st March, 2004. But deficit Court Fees continued to remain unpaid. A sum of Rs.200/- was filed on 31st August, 2004, but balance Court Fees remained unpaid and the deficit sum of Rs.700/- was deposited on 21st September, 2004.
(3.) An order was passed on 9th December, 2004 that the plaintiff had filed requisites and Court Fees paid were correct. It is only thereafter that the plaint was a validly instituted plaint. Summons were issued and written statement was filed which subsequently was amended too.;