KULDIP Vs. BABIT NAYAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 prays for setting aside order dated 22.7.2003 passed by the Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.) Ludhiana, dismissing the application of the defendant-petitioner in which prayer was made that suit of the plaintiff- respondent under Order 7 Rule 11 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short, "the Code") be rejected on account of non-payment of court fee.

(2.) THE plaintiff-respondent has filed Civil Suit No. 27 of 14.1.2003 seeking rendition of account of the dissolved firm M/s Triveni Processor, B-XXXII- 736/16, Bahadurke Road, Dying Complex, Ludhiana and also sought permanent injunction restraining defendant-petitioner from carrying on a similar business in the firm name or from using any of the property of the firm for his own benefit until the affairs of the firm have been completely wound up. Another relief prayed was for restraining the defendant-petitioner from alienating or disposing of the assets of the firm, in any manner whatsoever.

(3.) MR . Vikas Sagar, learned counsel for the defendant-petitioner has argued that once the plaintiff-respondent herself has evaluated the suit then there is no escape from affixing the court fee on the value assessed and she cannot be held entitled to delay payment of court fee till after the judgment and decree is delivered. According to the learned counsel the right of the defendant-petitioner would be materially prejudiced by non-payment of court fee and under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code the plaint is liable to be rejected. In support of his submission, the learned counsel has placed reliance on a judgment of this Court in the case Bachni Devi v. Tej Ram, 1993 ISJ 437.