IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH MARCH 2008 / 22ND PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 8206 of 2008(B) ------------------------- OS.148/2007 of MUNSIF COURT, KANJIRAPPALLY .................... PETITIONER: ------------ DAMODARA PANICKER, AGED 70, S/O.KRISHNAN NAIR, PUTHENPURACKAL, ERUMELY SOUTH VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.T.I.ABDUL SALAM SRI.C.HARINDRA MOHAN NAIR RESPONDENT: ------------- AREESHKUMAR, S/O.DAMODARA PANICKER, PUTHENPURACKAL, ERUMELY SOUTH VILLAGE. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.C. NO. 8206 OF 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 12th day of March, 2008. J U D G M E N T This writ petition is preferred against the order of the Munsiff, Kanjirapplly in I.A.231/08 in O.S.148/07 whereby the Court refused to entertain an application for setting aside the Commissioner's report. The suit is one for setting aside the document and for a prohibitory injunction. Court fee is paid under Section 25(b) of the Court Fees Act. There was dispute with respect to the market value of the property. A Commissioner was appointed and she has submitted her report. The Court below found that the Commissioner has clearly identified the property. The Court further held that the Commissioner has taken into account all factors in fixing the income from the property. 2. I had also gone through the Commissioner's two reports. The Commissioner has stated there were 39 rubber trees which can be tapped and 10 trees which has not W.P.C 8206 OF 2008 -:2:- reached that stage. The Commissioner has also given the girth of the trees. She has taken into account how long it can be tapped and held that it can be tapped for 100 days and each day it will give 1.20 kgs. and estimated the value at Rs.90 deducted the actual expenses and arrived at a figure. She has also calculated the other income at Rs.300/- which has been subsequently corrected as Rs.3000/-. She had also considered the age of the coconut trees standing in the property, its present yielding capacity and had estimated the same. So it is on that basis the income is calculated. Under Section 7(2) of the Court Fees Act, when the property is capable of yielding, 10 times the annual gross profit minus the land value shall be the market value of the property for the purpose of fixing the Court fee jurisdiction. Therefore there was some mistake and therefore the Court directed the plaintiff to amend the plaint and to pay the Court fee for Rs.56,700/-. I do not find any material irregularity committed by the Court below. W.P.C 8206 OF 2008 -:3:- 3. The learned counsel for the writ petitioner would submit that it can be tapped after 150 days. It is necessary that when there is whole day tapping without weekly rain guard the probable tapping will be only 100 days and only when there is rainguard it comes to 150 days. There is no such evidence before the Court. The learned counsel would also submit that there is some mistake committed by the Commissioner regarding the yield from the property and there is dispute with respect to the identification of the property. There is no such dispute in the cost and so there is no force in that contention. Therefore I do not find any merit in this writ petition and hence it is dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-