IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.19311 of 2011 Madhuri Devi & Ors Versus Gopal Ram & Ors ----------- 04. 18.11.2011 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the defendants- petitioners against the order dated 13.01.2011 passed in Title Suit No.12 of 2010 whereby the learned Court below rejected the application filed by the petitioner under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C. praying for rejecting the plaint on the ground that the suit has been undervalued and the Court fee paid thereon is insufficient. From perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the learned Court below rejected the application and refused to decide this issue as preliminary issue. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the valuation of the suit property given by the plaintiff is very low and if the valuation is decided then the Civil Judge(Jr. Div.) will have no pecuniary jurisdiction to try the suit and, therefore, the petitioner filed an application for deciding this question as preliminary issue and to reject the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11. From perusal of the impugned order, it appears that only question raised by the petitioner before the Court below is that the suit has been undervalued. The 2 petitioner has not given the correct value of the subject matter of the suit. In Full Bench decision of this Court reported in 1987 PLJR 370(Md. Alam vs. Gopal Singh& ors.), it has been held that the estimation of the value of the relief claimed by the plaintiff has to be ordinarily accepted. Now, therefore, unless evidence is adduced in support of the fact that the valuation of the suit property given by the plaintiff is more than the value provided by the plaintiff, no finding can be recorded about the market value of the subject matter of the suit. According to Order 14 Rule 2 CPC, the Court has to pronounce judgment on all issues. So far this Rule 2 of Order 14 is subject to Sub Rule 2. According to Sub Rule 2, if the issues both of law and fact arises in the suit and the Court is of opinion that the case or any part thereof may be disposed of on an issue of law only it may try that issue first if that issue relates to the jurisdiction of the Court or a bar to the suit created by any law for the time being in force. Therefore, the question that may be decided by the Court as preliminary issue must be a question of law only which will be decided if it touches the jurisdiction of the Court or a bar to the suit created by any law arises. Here, the question of valuation of the plaint cannot be said to be the question of law. It is a question of fact. 3 In (2011) 8 SCC 249(Ram Rameshwari Devi & ors. vs. Nirmala Devi& ors.), the Apex Court has held that the issue relating to proper valuation of suit for the purpose of Court fee and jurisdiction cannot be treated as an issue of law because it neither related to the jurisdiction of the Court to entertain suit nor to bar created by any law as provided under Order 14 Rule 2 Sub Rule 2 CPC. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case and the well settled propositions of law laid down by the Apex Court and the Full Bench decision of this Court, I find no merit in this writ application and in supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the impugned order cannot be interfered with. Accordingly, this writ application is dismissed. Saurabh ( Mungeshwar Sahoo, J.)