IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 31ST JULY 2008 / 9TH SRAVANA 1930 CRP.No. 590 of 2008() --------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 18/06/2008 IN IA 3806/2007 IN OS.68/2003 of I ADDL.SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... REVN. PETITIONER: ------------------ S.SURESH KUMAR, S/O.SREEDHARAN NAIR, ABHIRAMI, NEDUMANGAD, NARUVAMCODE, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.G.S.REGHUNATH RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. K.THANKACHAN, S/O.KOCHUKRISHNAN, T.C.17/2445, MELARANNOOR, KARAMANA, TRIVANDRUM, PERMANENT ADDRESS PULIMOODU KEEZHAKATHIL VEEDU, THAMMARACKKAL SOUTH, KUMARAPURAM VILLAGE, KARTHIKAPALLY TALUK, ALLEPPEY DISTRICT. 2. PRAMOD, S/O.GOPINATHAN, NANDAN, T.C.40/439 ESWARA VILASOM ROAD, JAGATHY, TRIVANDRUM. BY THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ------------------------------- C.R.P.No.590 of 2008 ------------------------------- Dated this the 31st July, 2008. O R D E R Petitioner is the plaintiff and respondents the defendants in O.S.No.68 of 2003, on the file of Additional Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram. The suit was rejected under Rule 10(c) of Order VII of Code of Civil Procedure for non-payment of balance court fee. Petitioner thereafter filed I.A.No.3806 of 2007 to review the order rejecting the plaint. Learned Sub Judge dismissed the petition as per the impugned order, dated, 18.6.2008, for the sole reason that an appeal is provided under the Code. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner was heard. 3. When a plaint is rejected under Rule 10(c) of Order VII of Code of Civil Procedure for non-payment of balance court fee, two remedies are available to the plaintiff. He can file a regular appeal challenging the dismissal. He is also entitled to file a petition for review by paying the balance court fee, and showing the reason, why he could not pay the balance court fee within the time as provided CRP.No.590 of 2008 2 under the Act. In such circumstances, dismissal of the petition for the sole reason that only remedy available is filing of an appeal is not sustainable. Therefore, the impugned order is quashed. Learned Sub Judge is directed to re-consider I.A.No.3806 of 2007 on merit, and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law. C.R.P. is disposed as above. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE nj.