Rajakumari, v. Manjini
Case brief
What is this about?
High Court allowed revision petition finding trial court correct in valuing house site at market value. Court quashed order directing RLFC and remanded suit to District Munsif within revised jurisdiction limit of Rs.1 lakh with fee payment.
What did the court decide?
Suit remanded to District Munsif Court; petitioner directed to file within two months and pay deficit court fee.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 21.03.2019
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR
CRP PD No.1454 of 2011 and
M.P.No.1 of 2011
Rajakumari .... Petitioner
Vs.
1. Manjini
2. Dr.Swaminathan
3. S.Dhanalakshmi
4. S.Karthikeyan
5. Lakshmi
6. M.Ganesaraja
7. Saraswathi
8. Sivagamasundari
9. Murthy
10. Raja
11. Selvi ... Respondents
Prayer : Civil Revision Petition filed under Section Article 227 of
the Constitution of India against the order dated 16.02.2011 passed in CMA No.33 of 2005 by the Additional Subordinate Judge, Pondicherry confirming the decree and judgment dated 02.11.2004 passed in O.S.No.537 of 2001 by the II Additional District Munsif, Pondicherry.
For Revision Petitioners : Mr.Perumal For Respondents 9 to 11 : Mr.G.Astorpathy for M/s Pan Associates For Respondents 2 and 3 : Mr.Anand Johnson
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the trial court erred in determining pecuniary jurisdiction based on market value of a house site versus agricultural land valuation.
Whether the revised pecuniary limit justifies filing the suit in the District Munsif Court.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Rajakumari
- respondent
Manjini
Coram
N.SATHISH KUMAR
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court