The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for the court to exercise its discretionary power under Section 149 C.P.C. judiciously, record reasons for extending the time for payment of deficit court fee, and give notice to the defendant before granting such time.

1. This civil revision petition has been filed to set aside the order passed in I.A.No.96 of 2006 in O.S.No.86 of 2006 on the file of the I Additional Subordinate Judge, Tirunelveli dated 19.07.2006.

2. The revision petitioner is the plaintiff, whereas the respondent is the defendant in the suit in O.S.No.86 of 2006 on the file of I Additional Subordinate Judge, Tirunelveli.

3. The respondent has filed I.A.No.96 of 2006 under Order 7 Rule 11(c) C.P.C. to reject the plaint. According to the respondent, he did not borrow Rs.1,50,000/-from the petitioner on the basis of the promissory note executed on 10.06.2002. He borrowed only Rs.8,500/-and Rs.15,000/- and already he discharged the same on 14.03.2004. The suit promissory note is a fabricated document.

4. According to the respondent, the petitioner paid only Rs.5,500/-as Court fee at the time of filing the suit as against the Court fee payable by him. The petitioner did not comply with the directions of the Court to pay the deficit Court fee for more than 10 months and ultimately the Court fee was paid on 10.05.2006 without any permission from the Court under Section 149 C.P.C. and hence the suit is not valid in law. When the Court did not extend the time for payment of Court fee mere payment of Court fee beyond the period of limitation is not valid in law and will not extend the period of limitation. On these grounds, the respondent prayed for rejection of the plaint.

5. The petitioner filed counter affidavit stating that the entire Court fee could not be paid at the time of presentation due to non-availability of stamp papers, which is beyond the control of the petitioner. When the Court accepted the subsequent payment of deficit Court fee, it has to be presumed that Court has extended the period for payment of Court fee and it must be treated that the Court fee has been paid at the time of presentation of plaint itself. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the application filed under Order 7 Rule 11(c) C.P.C.

6. The learned I Additional Subordinate Judge, Tirunelveli considering the materials on record, pleadings and arguments of the counsel for the petitioner and the respondent, allowed the application by order dated 19.07.2006 and rejected the plaint. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner has filed the present Civil Revision Petition.

7. Heard Mr.S.Kadarkarai, learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner and Mr.T.S.R.Venkatramana, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

8. The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that once the insufficient Court fee paid and subsequently it was accepted, it is presumed that the Court has extended the time for payment of deficit Court fee and subsequent payment date backs to original date of presentation of plaint. The order extending time for payment of deficit Court fee is an administrative order. There is no necessity to file an application under Section 149 C.P.C. to get permission to pay the deficit Court fee. The learned I Additional Subordinate Judge, Tirunelveli failed to apply the principles properly and wrongly applied the ratio laid down in the judgment relied on by the learned counsel for the respondent.

9. To substantiate his claim, the learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the following judgments:

(i) State Bank of Travancore v. A.R.Thirumurthy and others [AIR 2003 NOC 115 (Madras) = 2002 AIHC 3376]. wherein in paragraph 14, it has been held as follows:

"14. The time granted by the court for the representation of the plaint, is only an administrative order and not a judicial order, and as such, if there is any delay in the representation of the plaint, an application to excuse the said delay could be filed under Section 151, CPC and it need not necessarily be the one under Section 148, CPC. In fact, Section 151, CPC is an omnibus provision available in the code to make suitable orders, which are necessary to meet the ends of justice and therefore, the application, which was filed unde