ROSHANI DEVI Vs. RAVINDER KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Plaintiff Roshani Devi (now petitioner) had instituted a suit for mandatory injunction seeking decree to execute and register the sale deed of land detailed and described in the suit and in the alternative seeking recovery of ^ 33,14,500/- along with interest @ 2% per month from the date of sale deed till its realization. It was on the application of the defendant seeking direction to the plaintiff petitioner to affix ad-valorem Court fees, the plaintiff had taken the plea in her reply denying the contentions and taking the plea that she had sought in the alternative relief and therefore no Court fee is required to be affixed by way of alternative relief. The Court of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kurukshetra vide orders dtd. 7/12/2015 directed the plaintiff todeposit the ad-valorem Court fees and that is how the present civil revision petition has come about.

(2.) Upon hearing Mr. R.S. Longia, Advocate for the petitioner; Mr. Aayush Gupta, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 4 and perusal of the records.

(3.) The provisions of Sec. 7 (i) of the Court Fees Act, 1870 (in short, 'the Act') which are reproduced below to lay emphasis, ensures that in a suit for money, the Court fee is to be affixed according to the amount claimed.