ANITA SHARMA AND OTHERS Vs. MANINDER KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS -defendants have filed the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution for setting aside the impugned order dated 6.11.2007 (P. 3) passed by learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Ludhiana vide which their application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC has been dismissed as not maintainable and the defence of the defendants has been struck off.

(2.) FACTS of the case are that the respondent -plaintiff Maninder Kaur filed a Civil Suit No. 682 dated 17.4.2006 for recovery of Rs. 50 lacs as damages on account of loss of reputation etc against the defendants -petitioners. During the pendency of the suit, petitioners -defendant Nos. 3 to 5 filed an application (P. 2) under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC for rejection of the plaint for non -affixation of proper court fee on the plaint but the learned trial Court while passing the impugned order dated 6.11.2007 held the same not maintainable and struck off the defence of the petitioners, hence the present petition.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the defendants -petitioners argues that the plaintiff -respondent had claimed a specific amount of Rs. 50 lacs as damages and thus in view of the provisions of Section 7(i) of the Court Fee Act, 1870 (for short "1870 Act"), he is liable to pay the ad valorem court fee and in support of his contention, he has relied upon a judgment of this Court reported as Ranjit Kaur and others v. Punjab State Electricity Board, : 2007 (1) Civil Court Cases 793 (P&H).