B. S. A. SWAMY, J. ( 1 ) THE plaintiff filed C. M. P. No. 16839 of 2001 along with this civil revision petition for condonation of delay in presenting it (this civil revision petition ). ( 2 ) ON the said CMP No. 16839 of 2001, this court, by Order Dated 14-9-2001, ordered notice. Though notice was served, the respondent did not choose to appear before this Court either in person or through counsel. In those circumstances. By Order, dated 12-10-2001, I condoned the delay in filing this civil revision petition. Now, this civil revision petition has come up for admission. ( 3 ) AS no purpose would be served by giving another notice on admission of this civil revision petition, as the respondent did not choose to appear before this Court at the stage of condoning the delay in filing this civil revision petition even after receipt of notice I am inclined to proceed with the matter. Further, the suit was returned for non-payment of Court-fee. Questioning that order, this civil revision petition was filed. Hence, the respondent will not have any locus standi unless the suit is taken on file and summons are issued for his appearance. Hence, on this ground also, I feel that the respondent is not a necessary party to this civil revision petition. Accordingly, I am inclined to proceed with the merits of this civil revision petition. ( 4 ) THE case of the petitioner is that he filed a suit for recovery of money on the foot of a Promissory Note on the last day of limitation prescribed for filing the suit. As required Court-fee stamps were not available locally, the petitioner presented the suit with an application under sections 151 and 149 CPC seeking one- month s time for payment of Court-fee. But the Court below rejected the plaint on the ground of non-payment of Court-fee. ( 5 ) I have gone through Section 149 cpc. Admittedly, the Court is having discretionary power to extend time for payment of whole or part of Court-fee at any stage of the suit. The discretion is expected to be exercised judicially. The case of the petitioner is that due to nonavailability of Court-fee stamps locally he was forced to file the suit without affixing court-fee stamps. For that purpose, he filed an interlocutory application also seeking one month s time for payment of Court-fee. The discretion is expected to be exercised judicially. The case of the petitioner is that due to nonavailability of Court-fee stamps locally he was forced to file the suit without affixing court-fee stamps. For that purpose, he filed an interlocutory application also seeking one month s time for payment of Court-fee. But, without considering the request of the petitioner, the Court below rejected the plaint on the ground of non-payment of court-fee. ( 6 ) I have no manner of doubt that the order of the Court below is vitiated by nonapplication of mind to the facts of the case. Hence, the order of the Court below is set aside; and the matter is remanded back to the Court below for fresh consideration on the plea of the petitioner and for passing appropriate order. The petitioner is directed to represent the papers with Court-fee stamps forthwith. The Court below shall consider the plea of the petitioner with regard to the non-availability of the Courtfee stamps at the time of filing of suit and pass appropriate orders by making necessary inquiry , If the Court below comes to the conclusion that the Court-fee stamps were not available the interlocutory application is to be allowed. Once that interlocutory application is allowed, the suit is to be taken on file as if the suit is constituted within the period of limitation. The Court below shall dispose of the matter in accordance with law. ( 7 ) THE civil revision petition is accordingly allowed. No costs.