1. The revision petitioners are the defendants 2 and 3 in O.S.No.113 of 2009, on the file of the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No.II, Salem. They filed an application in I.A.No.996 of 2009, to reject the plaint, for non-payment of the Court fee within the time granted by this Court vide order dated 08.01.2008, passed in C.R.P.No.(NPD)1399 of 2006. That application was dismissed and as against the same C.R.P.(PD)No.3861 of 2009, was filed.

2. Originally, the respondents filed a suit against the revision petitioners and one another person by name Mr.J.Ajit Jain, for declaration that the registered sale deed dated 14.11.2005, executed by the first defendant, in favour of the revision petitioners is void ab initio and for consequential injunction. That suit was numbered as O.S.No.1135 of 2005, on the file of the First Additional District Munsif, Salem.

3. As the respondents/plaintiffs valued the suit under Section 25 (d) of the Tamil Nadu Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1955 ( hereinafter referred to as the said 'Act') at Rs.5,000/- and paid the Court fee of Rs.375.50, the revision petitioners filed an application in I.A.No.1981 of 2005 under Order 7, Rule 11 of Code of Civil Procedure ( in short 'C.P.C.') to reject the plaint, on the ground that the suit filed was under valued and the respondents ought to have valued the suit under Section 40 of the said Act and pay the Court fee on the value of the subject matter of the suit, which was mentioned as Rs.30,00,000/-. That application was allowed and the respondents were directed to pay the Court fee on Rs.30,00,000/- as per the Section 40 of the said Act and that was challenged by the respondents in C.R.P.(NPD)No.1399 of 2009. This Court allowed the said revision petition filed by the respondents, with a direction, directing the Court below to return the plaint to the respondents/plaintiffs for re-presentation, after paying the Court fee and granted two months time for re-presentation before the appropriate forum for paying necessary Court fee.

4. Thereafter, the respondents filed a petition under Order 33, Rule 1 of C.P.C. seeking permission of the Court below to permit the respondents/ plaintiffs to pursue the suit as an indigent person stating that they were not able to pay the requisite Court fee and that permission was granted by the Court below permitting the respondents/plaintiffs to sue as indigent persons. After various re-presentation, the respondents/plaintiffs re-presented the plaint along with the requisite Court fee and also filed an application to condone the delay of 247 days in re-presenting the petition filed under Order 33, Rule 1 of C.P.C. and as the respondents/ plaintiffs paid the Court fee, the Court below directed the Office to number the suit and the suit was numbered as O.S.No.113 of 2009. At that point of time, the revision petitioners filed I.A.No.996 of 2009, under Order 7, Rule 11 of C.P.C., to reject the plaint for non-payment of the Court fee within time granted by this Court in C.R.P.(NPD)No.1399 of 2006.

5. It is contended by Mr.D.Shivakumaran, the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioners that as per the order passed in C.R.P.(NPD)No.1399 of 2006, two months time was given to the respondents/ plaintiffs to re-present the plaint for valuing the suit as per Section 40 of the said Act and the Court below was directed to return the plaint to the respondents within a period of one week time from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. As directed by this Court, the plaint was returned by the I Additional Judge, Fast Track Court No.1, Salem, to the respondents on 30.01.2008 to comply with the order passed in C.R.P.(NPD)No.1399 of 2006 and granted two months time.

6. Thereafter, the respondents/plaintiffs filed an application under Order 33, Rule 1 of C.P.C., seeking permission of the Court to prosecute the suit filed by them as indigent persons and after gaining time, they finally paid the Court fee and re-p