DAYA MEENA Vs. SATISH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) There is no appearance on behalf of respondents No.3 and 4 despite service. Mr. Kumar states that he has been appearing on behalf of respondents No.1 and 2 before the Trial Court.

(2.) The petitioner is aggrieved of the order dated 03.07.2018 passed by the Court of learned Additional District Judge-01, North-East District, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi (ADJ) in CS No.139/2018 by which his application for return/adjustment of the court fees under Section 151 CPC was dismissed.

(3.) The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner filed a Civil Suit No.08/2014 for cancellation, declaration, eviction and possession under Section 31 and 34 of the Specific Relief Act, 1964 before the Civil Judge, Shahdara District, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi. The petitioner paid court fees of Rs.13/- on the plaint. The learned Civil Judge by an order dated 18.04.2018, directed that the plaint be returned in an appropriate Court having pecuniary jurisdiction.