HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 6197 OF 2009 Friday, the Thirty First day of November, Two Thousand and Nine Between M.Surya Prakash Petitioner AND M/s. Vishnu Chits Private Limited, Rep. Office 1-4, Upper Ground Floor, Liberty Plaza, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad and others Respondents THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI C.R.P. NO. 6197 OF 2009 ORAL ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is preferred by the first defendant in O.S. No. 192 of 2007 on the file of the V Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, aggrieved by the order dated 10.11.2009 dismissing I.A. No. 915 of 2009 filed under Order VII Rule 10 CPC seeking to return the plaint to the plaintiff – first respondent herein for presentation before proper court. The first respondent herein filed the above suit for recovery of a sum of Rs.1,05,902/- towards the sum due for 17 instalments out of 40, of a chit transaction at the rate of Rs.5,000/- per instalment. It is case of the subscriber - petitioner herein that the first respondent company cannot claim any amount more than the ledger account and since the ledger account shows only a sum of Rs.100/- as due, the plaint is liable to be returned to the company for presentation before proper court having pecuniary jurisdiction; whereas it is the case of the first respondent company that the sum of Rs.100/- is shown as due for the earlier instalment in the ledger inasmuch as the cheques issued by the petitioner were dishonoured and the charges are debited to his account and, as such, the petitioner is not right in contending that as the first respondent company has shown a sum of Rs.100/- as due, the plaint is liable to be rejected. The court below dismissed the above application observing that the amount of Rs.100/- shown due is in respect of a particular instalment towards bank charges debited to the account of the petitioner for the dishonoured cheque. Apart from this, the court below further observed that the account further shows some amounts due for earlier instalments for which the cheuqes issued by the petitioner herein were dishonorued and similar charges are debited to the account of the petitioner. Aggrieved thereby the present Civil Revision Petition is filed by the first defendant in the suit. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the plaint is liable to be returned inasmuch as the ledger account maintained by the first respondent herein shows balance to be paid by the petitioner as only Rs.100/- and, as such, the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Senior Civil Court cannot be invoked. As observed by the court below, column No.12 of the Statement of Account, required to be maintained by the first respondent company, in compliance of Rule 25 of the A.P.C.F. Rules, relates to the amount due by the subscriber/petitioner herein pertaining to a particular instalment. Therefore, the petitioner cannot contend that the said amount represents his entire liability or the sum due in discharge of the prized chit. It is further case of the company that the petitioner had paid only 23 instalments out of 40 and he is liable to pay the sum equivalent to 17 defaulted instalments, which is not controverted by the petitioner. Having gone through the entire material available on record, I do not find any illegality or irregularity in the order impugned. Consequently, the Civil Revision Petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ____________________ Justice T. Meena Kumari December 31, 2009 MAS