KULWANT SINGH Vs. NIRMAL KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner herein is the plaintiff before the trial Court in Civil Suit titled 'Kulwant Singh Vs. Nirmal Kaur and Others'. He is aggrieved by the order dtd. 5/8/2022 (Annexure P-4), whereby he has been directed to pay the ad-valorem Court fee on the consideration amount as mentioned in the impugned sale deed, while allowing an application moved by respondent-defendant under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC.

(2.) It is contended by learned counsel that petitioner-plaintiff is not executant of the impugned sale deed dtd. 3/1/2013, which was allegedly executed by Shingara Singh, the father of the plaintiff, in favour of defendant No.1 Nirmal Kaur. Learned counsel further contends that petitioner did not seek exclusive possession of the suit property and rather, the relief claimed by him is that after setting aside the impugned sale deed, a decree for joint possession in equal share be passed, as plaintiff as well as defendant Nos. 2 to 7 are the legal heirs of Shingara Singh.

(3.) On the other hand, the contention of ld. counsel for the respondent is that since decree for possession is also sought, so plaintiff is liable to pay the ad valorem Court fee.