LAWS(DLH)-1999-10-86

MOHINDER KUMAR Vs. BHIM SAIN

Decided On October 12, 1999
MOHINDER KUMAR Appellant
V/S
BHIM SAIN Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against the order dated 30.9.1992 passed by the Sub-Judge, Delhi in Suit No. 585/1987. The respondents as plaintiffs filed the aforesaid suit for declaration and consequential relief of injunction praying therein that the WILLS dated 2.2.1982 and 28.3.1982 executed by late Roop Chand are invalid, illegal and void having no sanctity and having no authority on said Shri Roop Chand to dispose of the ancestral properties consisting of House No. 4-E/ 164, Amar Colony, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi. The plaintiffs also sought for a decree for injunction restraining the defendant No. I from taking any benefit and enforcing his right on the basis of the probate granted to him in respect of the money in the Almirah and in the account in Canara Bank and other assets, ornaments and house-hold goods.

(2.) The aforesaid suit was contested by the defendants, and on the basis of the pleadings of the parties as many as 8 issues were framed in the said suit. Out of the aforesaid issues, issues No. 1 & 3 which are in the following terms were treated as preliminary issues and they came to be decided by the impugned order dated 30.9.1992: 1. Whether the suit was properly valued for the purposes of Court fee and jurisdiction as alleged in the preliminary objection? 2. Whether the suit of the plaintiff is barred under the provisions of Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act?

(3.) The Trial Court heard the parties and thereafter held that the plaintiffs were entitled to value the suit and pay the Court fee as fixed by them in view of the fact that the suit was instituted seeking a decree that the Wills are null and void and therefore, the subject matter of the suit was not the property but the Wills and the case of the plaintiffs was covered under Section 7(iv)(c) of the Court Fees Act. The Trial Court. however, ordered that since the plaintiffs had not given any valuation for the consequential relief of injunction they are required to pay the Court fee and value the same on that count.