MANOJ JAIN Vs. KRISHNA JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This review petition is taken across the Board in Court inasmuch as the defendants no. 2 to 4/review petitioners had filed this review petition on 25.9.2012, but the same was returned under objection by the Registry. Counsel for the defendants no.2 to 4 states that so far as the court fee is concerned no court fee is payable except a sum of Rs.20/- as paid on the review petition, and with which submission I agree inasmuch as the suit for partition had been filed with a court fee of Rs.20/-, and therefore, a review petition containing this stamp duty of Rs.20/- is sufficient. This is more so because as per the law applicable on the date of filing of this suit, a decree for partition in a suit is not stamped on the basis of court fee payable, but the stamp duty is paid by means of a non-judicial stamp paper in terms of Article 45 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 inasmuch as by virtue of Section 2(15) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 an instrument of partition includes a decree for partition. This suit has been filed in 2007 i.e prior to the amendment w.e.f. 1.8.2012 of the Court Fees Act, 1870 as applicable to Delhi. This review petition be therefore registered and number be given by the Registry.

(2.) By this review petition the defendants no. 2 to 4 seek review of the judgment dated 31.7.2012 by which the suit for partition filed by the plaintiff was decreed and a preliminary decree was passed giving each of the parties to the present suit, who are the sons; daughters and the widow of late Sh. Lakhpat Rai Jain, 1/7 th share in the suit property bearing no. C-9, NDSE, Part-II, New Delhi as also in the other properties of the HUF.

(3.) By the judgment dated 31.7.2012, it was held that daughters have an equal right in the coparcenary property in terms of the amended Section 6(1) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 by virtue of Act 39 of 2005. Para 5 of the said judgment reads as under:-