R. Bhaskaran, J.

This revision petition is filed challenging the order passed by the Munsiff Court, Erattupetta in LA. 464/2000 in O.S.494/1999. By the impugned order the Munsiff Court has held that the plaintiffs have to pay court fee under S.25(a) of the Kerala Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act calculating the market value of the property on the basis of S.7 of the said Act. The revision petitioner is the defendant in the suit. According to the defendant the court fee has to be paid under S.40 of the Court Fees Act on the basis of the market value of the property involved in the suit and if the market value is taken into account the Munsiff Court has no jurisdiction to try the case.

2. The suit is for a declaration of the plaintiffs right and possession of the plaint schedule property and that the document dated 15.4.1997 is a sham document and not binding on the property and that the defendant has not obtained by right under the document. There is also a prayer for consequential injunction. The plaintiffs have valued the relief and paid court fee under S.25(b) of the Court Fees Act. The trial court found that the plaintiffs have sought for a declaration of right and p