Arun Kumar vs Ashok Kumar And Others on 14 December, 2009

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                    AT CHANDIGARH

                           Civil Revision No.4932 of 2006(O&M)
                           Date of Decision 14.12.2009

Arun Kumar
                                                      ...... Petitioner
                           VERSUS

Ashok Kumar and others
                                                      ...... Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL

Present:     Mr.Kul Bhushan Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner.

             Mr.Sanjay Mittal, Advocate, for the respondents.

                           *****

A.N.JINDAL, J(ORAL):

Aggrieved against the order dated 29.08.2006, passed by Civil

Judge (Junior Division), Rewari, allowing the application of the defendants-

respondents under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C., the petitioner-plaintiff (herein

referred as ‘the petitioner’) has preferred this petition.

Vide impugned order, the Court while replying upon the

application of defendants-respondents Under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C.,

directed the petitioner to pay the ad-valorem Court fee as per the market

value of the land involved under the decree which has been challenged by

the petitioner.

The petitioner has placed a strong reliance on the judgment

delivered in case Smt.Beena and others versus Rajinder Kumar and

others 2006 (2) P.L.R. 6. In the said case, the plaintiff had been directed to

pay the Court fee in a suit for declaration and the sale deeds have been

challenged on the ground that the land in dispute was ancestral and the same

had been sold without legal necessity. It was observed in the said judgment

that the trial Court had not taken into consideration the amendment made in
Civil Revision No.4932 of 2006(O&M) -2-

the State of Haryana vide Act No.22 of 1974. In the instant case also, the

trial Court while allowing the application did not take into consideration the

fact that the amendment made in the Court Fees Act vide Act No.22 of 1974

wherein Schedule Second Article 12 has been amended to provide for a

fixed Court fee or Rs.25/- on the plaint to the suit for declaration where no

consequential relief is prayed for.

Thus, while following the ratio of Smt.Beena’s Case (Supra),

this petition is disposed of with a direction to the trial Court to redetermine

the amount of Court fee payable in the terms of the aforesaid amendment in

the State of Haryana.

(A.N.Jindal)
Judge
14.12.2009
mamta-II