DHARAMDUTT @ HARPAL Vs. SMT.GEETA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Impugned in the present revision is the order dated 3.7.2015 (Annexure P3), passed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Rewari, vide which in an application filed by the defendant under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, the plaintiff was directed to pay the ad valorem court fee on the market value of the suit property. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also carefully gone through the file.

(2.) Plaintiff in this case has filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction challenging the release deed dated 20.1.2014 executed by him in favour of his daughter Geet Devi defendant on the ground of fraud. No relief of possession has been sought. During the pendency of the said suit, an application was filed for directing the plaintiff to pay ad valorem court fee on the market value of the land which was allowed. The lower Court has relied upon Section 7(4)(c) of the Court Fee Act 1870 (for short, ' the act') to hold that the ad valorem court fee on the market value of the said property is to be paid. It is not denying fact that an amendment has been made in Section 7 of the Act by the Haryana State. Section 7(4) (c) of the Act pertains to suit for declaration and consequential relief. It shows that the court fee is payable at the amount at which relief sought is valued in the plaint or memorandum of appeal. However, the proviso to the said section states that if the case is falling under sub clause (c), (which is applicable in the present case), the valuation shall not be less than the value of the property calculated in the manner provided for by clause (v) for this section. Clause (v) is reproduced as under-

(3.) Therefore, it is apparent that the court fee in case of land irrigated by perennial canal is Rs.60 per acre and in case of land irrigated by non-perennial canal or by well is Rs.50/- per acre.