SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 20614

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
SAM T. GEORGE – Appellant
Versus
MATHEWS T. GEORGE – Respondent


JUDGMENT

The plaintiff in O.S.No.47 of 2017 on the file of Sub Court, Pathanamthitta has filed this appeal. The suit was posted on 22.08.2023 for remitting balance court fee. Since it was not remitted on that day, the plaint was rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The suit was for a declaration that settlement deed No.355 of 2017 is null and void and for permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the 1st defendant from dispossessing the plaintiff from the plaint item No.1 property. 1/10th of the court fee was paid and the balance court fee was payable. The legal benefit fund of Rs.13,750/- was also payable and the plaintiff had paid only 1/10th of the said amount. The reason stated by the plaintiff for failure to pay the balance court fee is that in the absence of the plaintiff, his father in law Sri.Mathew C.T who was the power of attorney of the plaintiff was looking after the affairs in the suit and due to advanced age, he was having geriatric ailments, which led to non-payment of the balance court fee. It is submitted that, as per Section 149 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the court is empowered to grant extension of time for payment of balan

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top