Judgment :- Mishra, J. Heard. We do not find any reason to write either a detailed judgment or into any of the questions that arise as to the valuation of the suit for the purpose jurisdiction for, in the instant appeal what we notice is that by putting the valuation Rs.1,000 both for the purpose of the court fee as well as jurisdiction, C.S.No.240 was filed on behalf of the appellants/plaintiffs on the Original Side of this Court. The ation at the relevant time to attract the jurisdiction of the Original Side of mis Court Rs.50,000 and more which was later amended and made as Rs.1 lakh and above. plaintiff’s however, applied for amendment and sought for substitution of the statement as to the valuation in these terms: "The value of the suit is Rs.1000 for purposes of Court-fee Rs.1,00,100 for purposes jurisdiction and a Court-fee of Rs.75 is paid on the valuation of Rs.1,000 under Sec.28 Tamil Nadu Court-fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1955. ‘This amendment was objected to on the ground that the suit originally valued undoubtedly fit to be filed before the City Civil Court, Madras, and in fact that appropriate valuation, according to the plaintiff’s when they had originally presented plaint in the High Court. The amendment sought for was only for the purpose of the forum of the suit which should have been filed before the City Civil Court, Madras. trial Court, however, has accepted this contention and ordered for the return of the for presentation before the Court of competent jurisdiction. 2. Although the Code of Civil Procedure is not applied to a proceeding on the Original of, this Court for purposes for which there are specific provisions made in the Rules by this Court for the proceeding on the Original Side of this Court, Rule 3 in O.1 of the Original Rules States, “Except to the extent specifically provided for by these rules, the provisions of the Code apply to all proceedings. The rules and forms mentioned in Appendix III thereto and previous rules and forms, and the provisions of the Code, so far as such provisions inconsistent with these rules and forms, are hereby repealed and superseded and following rules, orders and forms shall stand in lieu thereof.” Code of Civil Procedure contains provisions, O.6 thereof, about the pleadings in general, wherein it is stated in Rule 1, ‘pleading’ shall mean plaint or written statement “and in 2,” pleading to state material facts and the evidence: (1) Every pleading shall contain, contain only, a statement in a concise form of the material facts on which the party pleading relies for his claim or defence, as the case may be, but not the evidence by which they to be proved “ and in Rule 4 it is stated, ” Particulars to be given where necessary: cases in which the party pleading relies on any misrepresentation, fraud, breach of wilful default or undue influence, and in all other cases in which particulars may necessary beyond such as are exemplified in the forms aforesaid, particulars (with dates items if necessary) shall be stated in the pleading. ” Rule 5 in that Order states”. 5. Further and better statements, or particulars: A further and better statement of nature of the claim or defence, or further and better particulars of any matter stated in pleading, may in all cases by ordered, upon such terms, as to costs and otherwise, as be just. “Rule 17 of O.6 states,” 17. Amendment of pleadings: The Court at any stage of the proceedings allow either to alter or amend his pleadings in such manner and on such terms as may be just, and such amendments shall be made as may be necessary for the purpose of determining real questions in controversy between the parties. ” As to what particulars may be contained in the plaint are stated in O.7. One of the necessary is to state (a) the name of the Court in which the suit is brought and (f) the showing that the Court has jurisdiction (Sub-rules (b) to (e) and (g) to (i) are not necessary for our purpose). ” As to what particulars may be contained in the plaint are stated in O.7. One of the necessary is to state (a) the name of the Court in which the suit is brought and (f) the showing that the Court has jurisdiction (Sub-rules (b) to (e) and (g) to (i) are not necessary for our purpose). If there is any defect in giving such particulars and an amendment for invoking the jurisdiction of the Court, how merely on the basis that such was the deliberately given and not by mistake as pleaded, the Court can refuse the amendment? would be a different situation if there is a plea raised that the value of the property than the value for which a suit can be filed on the Original Side of this Court. But if the of the property is not less than the value necessary for attracting the jurisdiction Court, a fact which is conceded before us by the respondents, to refuse the amendment mean denial of justice. 3. For the reason aforesaid we find good reason to interfere with the impugned judgment. The same is accordingly set aside and the amendment sought for is directed to be allowed accordance with the prescribed procedure of law. The appeal is allowed. No costs. Appeal allowed.