MEERA RANI Vs. VIKASARJUN AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DEFENDANT No. 2 has filed this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assailing order dated 08.10.2013 (Annexure P -5), passed by the trial court, thereby dismissing application (Annexure P -4) filed by defendant No. 2 - - petitioner for rejection of plaint due to nonpayment of proper court fee. In the suit, respondent No. 1 - - plaintiff has inter alia assailed Will executed by Ram Sarup in favour of plaintiffs brother defendant No. 1/proforma respondent No. 2 and the consequent sale deed dated 03.12.2012 executed by defendant No. 1 in favour of defendant No. 2.

(2.) DEFENDANT No. 2, in her application (Annexure P -4), alleged that the plaintiff is liable to pay ad valorem court fee on sale consideration of impugned sale deed dated 03.12.2012.

(3.) COUNSEL for the petitioner contended that since the aforesaid sale deed is under challenge in the suit, the plaintiff is liable to pay ad valorem court fee on sale consideration thereof. The contention cannot be accepted in view of judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Suhrid Singh @ Sardool Singh vs. Randhir Singh reported as : 2010 (2) Law Herald (SC) 1371 because the plaintiff is admittedly not party to the impugned sale deed. Consequently, the plaintiff is not liable to pay ad valorem court fee on sale consideration of impugned sale deed dated 03.12.2012. Here it may also be noticed that the plaintiff in plaint (Annexure P -3) has also not claimed the relief of possession of the suit property.