Assailing the finding of the court below that proper court fee has been paid and property has been properly valued, the 2nd defendant in the suit has come up with this original petition. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner brings to the notice of this Court Section 12 of the Kerala Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act and points out that it overrides Section 40 of the Act which is only a deeming provision.
3. It cannot be disputed that the issue on hand is covered by the decision referred to by the court below. As per the principle laid down in the said decision, court fee needs to be paid only under Section 40 of the Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act. The argument that Section 12 of the Act overrides Section 40 of the Act is fictitious. If valuation is not done properly, then only the question of Section 12 of the Act will arise for consideration. Section 40 of the Act, even though it is a deeming provision, has O.P.(C) No.2861/2014 2 the effect of a regular provision and it cannot be said that it is subservient to Section 12 of the Act. The plaintiffs are obliged to pay court fee under Section 40 of the Act only. The right given to the defendants under Section 12(2) of the Act does not override the obligation under Section 40 of the Act. There is no merit in the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner before this Court that Section 12 of the Act overrides Section 40 of the Act even though it is only a deeming provision.
This original petition is without merits and it is accordingly dismissed.
Sd/-
P.BHAVADASAN JUDGE smp