Singaravelu, J.

1. The plaintiff in the suit is the revision petitioner herein. The /plaintiff filed the suit against the State of Tamil Nadu and two others for a declaration that the revenue sale held by the Revenue Authorities on 9.10.1973 is null and void. The plaintiff valued the suit for the purpose of court-fee and jurisdiction under Section 25(d) of the Court-Fees Act. A check-slip was issued by the Court-fee Examiner pointing out that the suit should be valued and court-fee paid under Section 40(1) of the Court-Fees Act on the market value of the property. There was an enquiry and the trial Court found that the suit should be valued under Section 40(1) of the Court-Fees Act. A revision was preferred against that order and the same was dismissed. Later, the trial Court held that in this suit, the plaintiff should value the subject-matter at its market value. The Plaintif is aggrieved by this order and has come on revision,

2. I have heard Learned Counsel on both sides and perused the papers. The short point that arises for decision is whether under Section 40(1) of the Tamil Nadu Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, the court-fee is payable on the market value or on the va