Ratnavelu Pillai And Anr. vs Varadaraja Pillai And Anr. on 22 August, 1941
This is what Chandarshekhara Aiyar J. observed though 'obiter' in 'Ratnavelu Pillai v. Varadaraja Pillai', 1942-1 M.L.J. 569. There is no inconsistency between these two decisions. An order rejecting a plaint does not conclusively determine the rights of the parties; nor is it a formal expression of an adjudication determining the rights of any party with reference to any matter in controversy in the suit. Order 7, Rule 13, Civ. P. C. provides that the rejection of the plaint on any of the grounds mentioned in that order is no bar to a fresh suit on the same cause of action. Nevertheless, Section 2(2) enacts that an order rejecting a plaint under Order 7 Rule 12, Civ. P.C. shall be deemed to be a decree, apparently because the rejection of the plaint conclusively determines that the plff. is not entitled to bring his suit on a court-fee stamp of a value less than what has been found by the court, & to this extent there is a final decision. An appeal lies against an order rejecting the plaint, but not against an order demanding payment of additional court fee. The latter order is open only to a revision. If no revision petition has been filed against the order demanding additional Court-fee before the plaint is rejected for non-compliance with it, the remedy of the plff. is to appeal against the order rejecting the plaint. It is for this reason that Order 7, Rule 12 requires the court to pass a formal order rejecting the plaint giving the reasons for its conclusion. Though neither the order calling for payment of additional court-fee, nor the order rejecting the plaint for non-compliance with the order determines the rights of the parties, the Civil Procedure Code prescribes different remedies in the two cases, in the former case by a revision petition to this Court & in the latter case by an appeal to that Court to which an appeal from the decree passed in the suit would have been preferred. I therefore agree that the remedy of the plff. in this case was to have appealed against the order rejecting the plaint.