C.R.P.(PD) No.3528/2015 and C.R.P.(PD) No.3529/2015 have been filed by B.S.Garg, the first defendant in O.S.No.9417/2011 on the file of the XVI Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai challenging the common order and final orders of the said court dated 16.06.2015 made in I.A.Nos.12876/2012 and 12877/2012 in the said suit.

2. Notice before admission was issued and the respondents have entered appearance through counsel. The arguments advanced by Mr.S.R.Raghunathan, learned counsel for the petitioner in both the revisions, by Mr.V.Lakshminarayanan, learned counsel for the first respondent and by Mr.P.Vasanthakumar, learned counsel for the respondents 2 to 5 in both the civil revision petitions were heard. The certified copy of the common order and certified copies of the final orders passed in I.A.No.12876/2012 and 12877/2012 in O.S.No.9417/2011 on the file of the XVI Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai and copies of the other documents produced in the form of typed set of papers and also the grounds of revision were perused.

3. The first respondent in the civil revision petitions by name Mrs. R.Meena Sundar filed the above said suit O.S.No.9417/2011 against the revision petitioner and respondents 2 to 5 for a declaration declaring the sale deed dated 01.07.2011 registered as document No.2286/2011 on the file of the Sub Registrar, Royapuram in respect of a vacant site bearing plot No.12(part), 13(part) and 14(part) bearing old door No.349, which was changed into door No.118 and new door No.385, Tiruvottiyur High Road, Tondiarpet, Chennai 600 081 measuring an extent of 4713 sq.ft. to be sham and nominal and null and void and not binding on him, and for a consequential permanent injunction restraining the respondents 2 to 5 from alienating or encumbering the same to third parties or putting up any construction over the same.

4. The revision petitioner (first defendant in the said suit) filed two applications, namely I.A.No.12876/2012 and 12877/2012, the first one under Section 5 and 12 of the Tamil Nadu Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1955 and Order VII Rule 11(b) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for determining the correct court fee payable, keeping in mind the valuation of the sale deed dated 01.07.2011 bearing document No.2286/2011 and the second one for rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, 1908. The said applications were resisted by the first respondent/plaintiff by filing a common counter. The learned trial Judge, after hearing both sides, by a common order dated 16.06.2015 dismissed both the applications without cost. The said common order and the final orders passed in the above said interlocutory applications are challenged in the present civil revision petitions preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

5. The first respondent/plaintiff has filed the above said suit O.S.No.9417/2011 for the relief of declaration that a sale deed dated 01.07.2011 executed by the revision petitioner/first defendant and registered as Document No.2286/2011 on the file of SRO, Royapuram in respect of old door No.118, new door No.285, Tiruvottiyur High Road, Tondiarpet, Chennai 600 081, to be sham and nominal, null and void and not binding on the plaintiff and for a consequential permanent injunction restraining the respondents 2 to 5/defendants 2 to 5 from alienating and encumbering the said property to a third party and from putting up any construction over the same. The said prayer was made based on her contention that in March 2010, the revision petitioner/first defendant entered into an oral agreement with her for the sale of Plot Nos.6 to 14 along with a 20' common passage comprised in S.Nos.4310/36, 4310/1(part), C.A.No.394/97, R.S.No.4310/100 bearing door No.118, Tiruvottiyur High Road, Chennai -600 081 totally measuring 11 grounds 2123 sq.ft. for a sale consideration at the rate of Rs.50,00,000/-per ground; that the understanding was that sale deeds should be executed either in fav