RAJ KUMAR Vs. DADU DAYAL TRUST

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition has been filed against the order passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Narnaul directing the petitioners to pay ad valorem court fee on the sale consideration of the sale deeds.

(2.) THE petitioner-plaintiffs had brought a suit in the representative capacity seeking a declaration to the effect that Mandir Dadu Ji Maharaj (for short 'Mandir') was owner of the suit property on the basis of jamabandi for the years 1989-90 and that the change in mutation bearing No. 575 dated 12.12.1963 was based on fraud and by misrepresentation of facts and therefore, was not binding upon the right of the Mandir.

(3.) THE suit was contested by the defendants and by way of preliminary objections it was claimed that the suit was bad for want of ad valorem court fee. Learned trial Court came to the conclusion that the plaintiffs have sought the relief of declaration and consequential relief of permanent injunction and without cancellation of sale deeds, it cannot be said that the Mandir was owner of the property in question. Therefore, the learned trial Court held that the plaintiffs have sought the substantive relief regarding cancellation of sale-deeds by declaring the same to be illegal and not binding upon the rights of the Mandir, therefore, the authorities cited on behalf of the plaintiffs were not applicable to the facts of the case and consequentially held that ad valorem fee was payable on the sale consideration.