This revision petition assailing an order directing suit valuation under the Court Fees Act was dismissed. The court held that the trial order did not fall within the scope of section 115 CPC and was thus not revisible.
Revision petition dismissed; right to assail the order in appropriate proceedings remain intact.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN
THURSDAY, THE 8TH JANUARY 2009 / 18TH POUSHA 1930
CRP.No. 11 of 2009
------------------------------OS.1473/2004 of I ADDL.M.C., ERNAKULAM ....................
REVN. PETITIONERS/PLAINTIFFS:
BY ADV. SRI.N.SUBRAMANIAM
SRI.M.S.NARAYANAN
RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS:
THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
K.P. Balachandran, J.
C.R.P.No.11 of 2009
ORDER
This revision petition is filed assailing the
order passed by the trial court on Issue No.1 regarding the court fee, directing the petitioners/ plaintiffs to value the suit under Section 25B of the Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act as per the market value shown by the Commissioner, making necessary amendments. The said order does not fall within the scope of Section 115 CPC so as to be revisable by this Court in revision.
In the result, without prejudice to the right
of the petitioners to assail the order in appropriate proceedings, this revision petition is dismissed. Issue copy of this order to the counsel for the petitioners urgently.
8th January, 2009 (K.P.Balachandran, Judge) tkv
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an order directing valuation of suit property under Section 25B of the Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act is revisible under Section 115 CPC.
Whether the trial court's order falls within the scope of revision under Section 115 CPC.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Minita Daphne Netto
Rudolph Netto
Margaret Benedict Rodrigues
Infant Jesus Church, Broadway, Ernakulam
Josey D'Silva
Ignatious Alwin
K.P. Balachandran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
