1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. No one appears for the opposite parties, although notices had been sent and validly served upon them and vakalatnama had also been filed on behalf of one of the opposite parties.

2. This civil revision has been filed by the plaintiff-petitioner against order dated 18.7.2006 by which learned Subordinate Judge 3rd, Nawadah, directed the plaintiff to deposit ad valorem court fee on the valuation of the suit, namely Title Suit no. 55 of 2005.

3. The said suit was filed by the plaintiff-petitioner only for a declaration of his title over the suit land and for holding that the sale deed no. 4359 dated 25.4.2005 executed by Vijay Kumar Singh (defendant no. 2) in favour of Saroj Kumar (defendant no. 1) is fraudulent, forged, inoperative, showy, without consideration, void ab initio and not binding on the plaintiff. The valuation of the suit given in the plaint was 35,000.00 and in view of the nature of the relief fixed court fee Rs. 250.00 was paid. According to the said valuation the suit was filed before the learned Subordinate Judge. However, subsequently the valuation of the suit was enhanced to Rs. 60,000.00 at the instance of the p