The plaintiff in O.S.No.653/2005 on the file of Munsiff Court, Ernakulam is the petitioner in this writ petition. The petitioner filed the suit for declaration and for fixation of boundary. Plaintiff claimed ownership over B schedule property. Plaint C schedule property is described as part of plaint B schedule property. The defendant is the owner of the property adjoining A schedule property. It was alleged that he attempted to trespass into the plaint C schedule property. Plaintiff valued the subject matter of the suit as Rs.16,000/- and calculated the Court fee payable as Rs.680/-. At the time of institution of suit, he paid an amount of Rs.68/- as Court fee. There was dispute regarding the valuation of the subject matter of this suit.

2. On 11-11-2005, the court below heard the issue regarding valuation. The plaintiff filed I.A.10081/2005 under Order VI Rule 17 of Civil Procedure Code seeking to amend the valuation showing the total value of the subject matter of the suit as Rs.47033.50 and admitted that the court fee payable is Rs.320/-. The first prayer in the suit was valued under Sec.25(b) of the Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act (‘Court Fees Act’ for short) and half of the market value was shown as Rs.8,000/-. An amount of Rs.320/- was levied as the Court Fee payable on the first relief. For the 2nd relief, the market value of the entire property was shown as Rs.39,033.50 for the purpose of Court fee. The 2nd prayer in the suit was valued as per the provision of Sec.50(ii) of the Court Fees Act and a fixed Court fee of Rs.50/- was levied. The total court fee payable was fixed as Rs.370/- (320+50). It was averred that since Rs.68/- was already paid at the time of institution of the suit she was liable to pay only Rs.302/-. The court below considered the matter and held that the provision of law quoted was wrong and dismissed the application for amendment. The Court below directed the plaintiff to take steps to amend the valuation in accordance with Sec.50(iii) of Kerala Court Fees Act and pay the balance court fee. Challenging that order the plaintiff has filed this writ petition.

3. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner has argued that quoting of a wrong provision of law is immaterial. It is argued that a mere look into the petition will show that it was only a typographical error.

4. The learned Munsiff was carried away by the fact that the value of the subject matter for the 2nd relief was shown as Rs.39,033/-. The court below failed to note that the suit was filed before the Court of Munsiff. Sec.50 of the Court Fees Act deals with the suits filed before the revenue Court, Munsiff Court and Subordinate Judge’s Court. A reading of Sec.50 of the Court Fees Act shows that irrespective of the value of the subject matter if the suit is filed before the Munsiff’s Court the plaintiff need only to pay a fixed Court fee of Rs.50/- under section 50(ii) of the Act. If the value of the subject matter as a whole is less than rupees one lakh the suit can be filed before the Munsiff’s Court even if the value of the subject matter for the relief falling under Sec.50(ii) is more than Rs.25,000/-. The provision in Sec.50(iii) is applicable only if the suit is filed before the Sub Court. Sec.50 reads as follows:

“50. Suits not otherwise provided for: - In suits not otherwise provided for, fee shall be payable at the following rates: -

[(i) In a Revenue Court : Rupees twenty-five

(ii) In a Munsiffs Court : Rupees fifty

(iii) In a Sub Court or a

District Court : Rupees two hundred if the value of the subject

matter is Rs.25,000/- or less; and rupees four

hundred if the value of the subject matter is above

Rs.25,000/-]”

5. It is to be noted that Sec.50 was amended with effect from 05-12-1990 by Act 6 of 1991. Prior to the amendment the Court fees payable for such a relief in a suit filed before the Munsiff Court under Sec.50(ii) was Rs.30/-. In the Sub Court or District Court the court fee payable was Rs.100/- if the val