MEENA GARG Vs. NAVITA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dtd. 20/12/2024 passed by the Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Kharkhoda, vide which the application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC filed by the petitioners-defendants no.3 to 6 has been dismissed.

(2.) Respondents no.1 to 4 had filed a suit in which a prayer was made for declaration declaring the sale deed dtd. 1/8/2017 and the subsequent mutation and the revenue records existing in the name of defendant no.1 to the extent of 36/2378 share and also declaring sale deed dtd. 17/3/2022 and subsequent mutation no.13573 to be illegal having been entered on the basis of fraud and not binding on the rights of the plaintiffs and had further sought declaration that the plaintiffs were owners in joint possession to the extent of 36/2378 share in the abovesaid land.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that in the present case the plaintiffs were required to pay ad-valorem court fee and since the same has not been done, thus, the plaint deserves to be rejected. It is submitted that the suit is barred by limitation and thus, on the said ground also, the same deserves to be rejected. It is argued that the application filed by the petitioners under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC is meritorious and the same has been illegally rejected vide the impugned order dtd. 20/12/2024 and thus, the impugned order dtd. 20/12/2024 deserves to be set aside and the application filed by the petitioners under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC deserves to be allowed.