IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14006 of 2011 Bibi Qamrunnisa & Ors Versus Ekbal Khan ---------------------------------- 3. 07.09.2011 Heard learned senior counsel Mr. Raghiv Ahasan on behalf of the petitioners. This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners against the order dated 13.7.2011 passed by Sub Judge, Motihari East Champaran in Title Suit No. 524 of 2008 whereby the learned court below disposed of the application of the petitioner holding that at this stage the issue regarding valuation and payment of court fee cannot be decided as preliminary issue. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the plaintiff has given arbitrary valuation of the suit. According to the defendants the value of the suit property is more than Rs.4,00,000/- but the plaintiff has valued the same as Rs.1,00,000/-. In such view of the matter, according to the learned counsel learned court below should have decided the valuation of the plaint regarding payment of court fee and unless court fee is paid by the plaintiff the court could not have proceeded to decide the other issue. From perusal of the impugned order it appears that the learned court below observed that 2 even if it is said that valuation of the suit property is more than Rs1,00,000/- then also the court has jurisdiction to try the suit and, therefore, because evidence is necessary the same shall be decided at the time of final hearing of the suit along with other issues. According to the provision as contained under Order 14 Rule 2 sub Rule 2 it is not obligatory on the part of the court to decide an issue as preliminary issue. The discretion has been given to the court to decide an issue as preliminary issue only if the said issue is an issue of law only and it relates to the jurisdiction of the court or a bar to the suit has been created by any law. So far question of valuation of the suit is concerned here admittedly the Sub Judge has got unlimited jurisdiction. So far bar created by any law is concerned the issue raised here is not a bar created by any law. So far valuation is concerned it cannot be decided on the basis of affidavit, evidence is necessary and, therefore, in my opinion, the learned court below has rightly observed that the said issue shall be decided along with other issues at the time of final hearing of the suit. I therefore, find no merit in this application and accordingly, it is dismissed. S.S. (Mungeshwar Sahoo, J.)