1. This is plaintiff s revision. It is filed against the order dated 4th of April, 1998, passed by the IXth Additional District Judge, Jabalpur in Civil Suit No. 27-A/96. The trial Court required the applicant to pay the deficit of court-fee on Rs. Three Lakhs within one month of the date of the order in exercise of its powers under Order 7 Rule II (c) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

2. In order to understand the nature of controversy, regarding the payment of court-fee, between the parties to this revision, it is imperative to consider the allegations in the plaint for determining the nature of reliefs claimed by the applicant. The question of pecuniary jurisdiction and in given cases the question of payment of court-fee are intimately and inextricably connected with allegations in the plaint. It is often found that the real reliefs claimed as per body of the plaint are not reflected in the prayer clause. Therefore, the Courts, as a rule, determine the question of pecuniary jurisdiction and the payment of court-fee by reading the plaint as a whole instead of confining themselves to the prayer clauses. These principles are so well established that it is not necessary to cite an