SATISH ANAND Vs. DEEP CHAND ANAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of this application filed under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, defendant nos.1 to 3 sought rejection of the plaint in this suit for declaration, partition and possession etc. on more than one ground but during the course of hearing the only ground pressed into service by the learned senior counsel for the defendants at present was that the plaint is grossly undervalued for the purposes of court fees and jurisdiction. Other grounds were left to be urged at the final stage in case the plaint is not rejected now.

(2.) INITIALLY the present suit was filed by five sisters against their four brothers and one sister for a declaration that they were owners of 1/10th share in the assets left by their parents. Subsequently, on an objection being taken by the defendants that the suit for declaration simplicitor was not maintainable the plaintiffs amended the plaint and claimed the relief of partition as well as possession on various properties, movable as well as immovable, allegedly belonging to their parents. The plaint was valued, at that time, for the purposes of Court fee and jurisdiction at Rs. 23.05 lakhs for the relief of partition being the value of half share of the plaintiffs in the entire properties of their parents. The defendants contested the suit.

(3.) THE remaining three brothers had filed the present application for rejection of the plaint and, as noticed already, the rejection of the plaint at the time of hearing of the present application was sought only on the ground that the plaint as filed originally by the sisters was highly undervalued as far as the relief of partition of various immovable properties of the parents of the parties was concerned and therefore, the plaint was liable to be rejected in case the plaint was not correctly valued.