OM PARKASH Vs. INDRAWATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision petition directed against the order dated 24.11.2001 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Sirsa allowing the application of the defendant-respondents filed under Order VII rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for brevity, the Code) wherein a direction has been issued to the plaintiff-petitioner to pay the ad valorem court fee on the sale consideration of the two sale deeds namely No. 420 dated 28.4.2000 and sale deed No. 395 dated 27.4.2000. Aggrieved by the order dated 24.11.201, the plaintiff-petitioner has filed present revision petition.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case necessary for deciding the issues raised in this revision petition are that a civil suit No. 530-C of 2000 was filed by the plaintiff-petitioner challenging the sale deeds on various grounds. A declaration was sought to the effect that the sale deed No. 420 dated 28.4.2000 made by defendant-respondent No. 1 in favour of defendant-respondent No. 2 regarding the part of the suit land is liable to be set aside as the same is result of mis-representation and concealment of facts. It was also prayed that the other sale deed No. 395 dated 27.4.2000 executed by defendant-respondent No. 1 in favour of defendant-respondent No. 3 in respect of other part of the suit land is also liable to be set aside as the same is the result of fraud, mis-representation and concealment of facts. Therefore, the same is liable to be set aside. The consequential relief of permanent injunction restraining defendant-respondents No. 2 and 3 from further alienating, selling or transferring the suit land or any part thereof to anyone on the basis of the aforesaid sale deeds and from creating any type of bar, encumbrance or charge etc. in respect of the above said suit land in any manner or also restraining them from getting the mutation entered or sanctioned in their favour has also been sought. However, the plaintiff- petitioner has assessed the value of the suit at Rs. 200/- and affixed the court fee of Rs. 25/-. An application under order VII rule 11 of the Code was filed by the defendant-respondents seeking rejection of the plaint for affixing inadequate court fee and it was claimed that the provisions of section 7(iv)(c) of the Court-fees Act, 1870 (for brevity, 'the Act') would be attracted and the plaintiff-petitioner is liable to pay ad valorem court fee on the value of the sale deed. The Civil Judge accepting the application directed that the plaintiff-petitioner to pay court fee ad valorem on the sale consideration of the sale deeds. The order passed by the Civil Judge reads as under :

(3.) I have thoughtfully considered submissions of the learned counsel and perused the record with his assistance. I am of the considered opinion that this revision petition is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed. The provisions of section 7(iv)(c) of the Act may be referred in order to ascertain the statutory intention in cases where a declaration for setting aside the sale deed has been sought. Section 7(iv)(c) of the Act reads as under :