MAHILA LAXMI Vs. HARI SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved by the order dated 28.6.2013 passed by the District Judge, Shivpuri in Civil Suit No. 83-A/2012 whereby the petitioner has been directed to pad ad- valorem court fees. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed a suit seeking for declaring a sale deed dated 15.6.2011 executed by defendant No.1 in favour of defendants No. 2 and 3 as null and void and not binding upon him. It is submitted that in view of the decision of the Supreme Court rendered in the case of AIR 2010 S.C.2807 (Sushrid Singh @ Sardool Singh Vs. Randhir Sisngh & Ors.), the petitioner is not required to pay ad-voleram court fees as the petitioner is not a party to the sale deed and has also not sought any relief of possession. It is submitted that the aforesaid aspect has been ignored by the trial Court, hence the impugned order be set aside.

(2.) Learned counsel for the respondent, per contra, submits that the petitioner has prayed for declaring the sale deed as null and void and, therefore, he has to pay ad-voleram court fees as per the valuation of the sale deed made by him in the plaint itself.

(3.) The controversy involved in the present case is no more res-integra, in view of the decision of Supreme Court rendered in the case of Sushrid Singh @ Sardool Singh Vs. Randhir Sisngh & Ors. (supra), wherein the Supreme Court while taking into consideration the provisions of Section 7 of the Court Fees Act has held as under:-