SANDEEP KUMAR VERMA Vs. NARINDER PAL SINGH JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short point involved in this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is over an order dtd. 5/12/2017 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Court of learned Additional Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalandhar, wherein a suit for recovery of Rs.50.00 lacs as compensation anddamages on account of harassment and loss of income etc., has been filed. The plaintiff had tried to evade his obligation of affixing Court fees and have valued the suit tentatively to the tune of Rs.500.00 and an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC has been moved by the defendants for rejection of the plaint and it was vide order dtd. 5/12/2017 (Annexure P-1), the Court of learned Additional Civil Judge, Jalandhar directed the plaintiff to affix advalorem court fee on the plaint which is subject matter of present challenge.

(2.) Heard counsel for the parties and perused the records.

(3.) Appreciating the submissions of the two sides though on behalf of the revisionist Mr. Jagjot Singh Lalli has placed reliance on Sri Rathnavarmaraja Vs. Vimla 1961 AIR (SC) 1299, Subhash Chander Goel Vs. Harvind Saqar 2003 AIR (Punjab) 248, Saleem Vs. Usman Gani and another 2015 (2) PLR 39, Amandeep Sidhu Vs. M/s Ultratech Cement Limited and others 2015(1) Law Herald 767, Tarwinder KumarBedi Vs. Jit Parkash 2015(2) PLR 92 and Shiv Kumar Sharma Vs. Santosh Kumari 2008(2) BCR 213 and to controvert it learned counsel for the respondents has cited State of Punjab and others Vs. Dev Brat Sharma, Civil Appeal No.2064of 2022.