(1.) APPELLANT is the Plaintiff, who is challenging order of 5th February, 2009 of the learned Single Judge, directing the Appellant to pay court fee on his share in the suit property in a partition suit, as the Appellant is said to be in symbolic possession of the suit property. Appellant claims that the aforesaid order of the learned Single Judge, impugned in this appeal, also requires that the plaint be amended by the Appellant to seek cancellation of the Sale Deed.
(2.) THE impugned order is an outcome of the hearing by the learned Single Judge on the question of the maintainability of the suit and he has found Appellant's suit to be very much maintainable. Cross objections to the maintainability of the suit were preferred in this appeal by the Respondents, which, vide order of April 13, 2009 stand disposed of, by observing that summons of the suit have not yet been issued to the Respondents and therefore, it would be always open to the Respondents as Defendants to raise all the objections in respect of maintainability of the suit by filing an appropriate application before the learned Single Judge.
(3.) IN view of the aforesaid stand taken by learned senior counsel for the Appellant, we need not to dwell upon this aspect any further as it would be open to the Respondents to claim an issue at the appropriate stage regarding the valuation of the suit property.