After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and going through the plaint and the stage of the case, I am of the opinion the question whether the suit has to be dismissed in the absence of ad valorem court fee having been affixed by the plaintiff, is a mixed question of law and fact as the case of the plaintiff-respondent No.1 for specific performance of an agreement cannot be said to be strictly a suit for possession. The suit seems to be in the nature of a mandatory injunction seeking a direction to the defendant- petitioner to deliver the possession of the plot, the same having been agreed to be allotted to him on payment of consideration amount. Taking into consideration the totality of the circumstances, it is felt that ends of justice will be adequately met in case the plaintiff- respondent No.1 is permitted to proceed with the case. It is further observed that in case any objection regarding the court fee is raised, the same would be decided, in accordance with law, after framing a necessary issue in this regard. In case, ultimately, it is held that the ad valorem court fee is required to be affixed, it will be open to the trial court to issue a direction to the plaintiff to make good the deficiency of court fee, in accordance with law by deciding the issue of court fee. Similarly, the plea of limitation will
