AYESHA Vs. HIRAWATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution, the petitioner has challenged an order dated 27.03.2018 passed by the ADJ-03 (South), Saket Courts, New Delhi in CS No. 7240/2016, by which the petitioners'/defendants' application under Order VII Rule 11 (c) and (d) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ["CPC"] has been rejected. It is the contention of the petitioners/defendants that the plaintiff failed to make good the deficient court fee, despite opportunity being granted for the purpose, and the plaint, therefore, ought to have been rejected.

(2.) The suit is between members of a family. It was instituted in the year 2009, originally in this Court, and the plaintiff/respondent sought possession, cancellation of the sale deed, permanent injunction, and mesne profits. While issuing summons on 18.03.2009, this Court granted the plaintiff one week's time to file the deficient court fee. By a subsequent order dated 27.04.2009, it was recorded that the deficient court fee of Rs.22,850 has been filed. The suit was thereafter transferred to the Trial Court, pursuant to an enhancement of its pecuniary jurisdiction, and is now pending at the stage of final arguments, after completion of evidence.

(3.) On 04.10.2017, the defendant no. 1 (petitioner no. 1 in this Court) filed the application under consideration under Order VII Rule 11(c) and (d) of the CPC. It was alleged therein that, in addition to the court fee of Rs.22,900/- filed alongwith the plaint, the plaintiff had paid court fee only of Rs.2,850/- and not Rs.22,850/-, as recorded in the order of this Court dated 27.04.2019. Although the contention was also taken that the plaint did not disclose a cause of action, that argument was not pressed before me.