THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITON NO.255 OF 2009 DATED: 03-02-2011. Between Smt. Aruna Devi … Petitioner-D1 And I. M.Satish Kumar and another …Respondents-Plaintiff and D2 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITON NO.255 OF 2009 ORDER: This revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed aggrieved by the order, dated 03-11-2008, in I.A.No.854 of 2008 in O.S.No.1092 of 2007, on the file of the II Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, whereunder and whereby the application filed under Order VII Rule 11 CPC to reject the plaint, was dismissed. 2. Order VII Rule 11 (b) CPC reads that when the relief claimed is undervalued, and the plaintiff, on being required by the Court to correct the valuation within a time to be fixed by the Court, fails to do so, then only the plaint shall be rejected. 3. As rightly contended by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner herein under Section 39 of the Andhra Pradesh Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1956, in a suit for specific performance, with or without possession, fee shall be payable in the case of contract of sale computed on the amount of the consideration. Therefore, the trial Court instead of dismissing the application, ought to have directed the plaintiff to value the main relief for the purpose of determination of Court fee. Therefore, the impugned order is set aside and the plaintiff is directed to value the main relief claimed for the purpose of payment of Court fee, which has to be acceptable to the Court and thereafter, the trial Court shall give a reasonable opportunity for payment of Court fee. If the plaintiff fails to pay the Court fee, then only the plaint has to be rejected as required under Order VII Rule 11 (b) CPC. 4. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed to the extent indicated above. No order as to costs. -------------------- K.C.BHANU, J DATED: 03-02- 2011 Hsd