LAWS(DLH)-2014-8-179

AARTI SHARMA Vs. BILLU

Decided On August 20, 2014
AARTI SHARMA Appellant
V/S
Billu Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition impugns the order of the court below dated 02.04.2014 which has rejected the application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC filed by the petitioner/defendant. The application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC was filed because as per the petitioner/defendant, the suit was not properly valued and the appropriate court fee was not paid. The subject suit is a suit for declaration and injunction.

(2.) TRIAL court has held that since the respondent/plaintiff is not a party to the subject document which is sought to be voided, hence the plaintiff/respondent did not have to seek cancellation of the same and a suit for declaration that the document/sale deed was void was sufficient. The trial court has in this regard relied upon the observations of the Supreme Court in the case of Suhrid Singh @ Sardool Singh vs. Randhir Singh & Ors., : AIR 2010 SC 2807.

(3.) IN view of the above, since the respondent/plaintiff is not required to seek cancellation of the deed to which he was not a party, but since the plaintiff/respondent is only seeking a declaration, the trial court was justified in relying upon the ratio of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Suhrid Singh (supra) for dismissing the application of the petitioner/defendant under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. The respondent/plaintiff/landlord was given possession of the suit property at the time he purchased the suit property.