RAJ RANI Vs. KAMLESH @ MEENA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 24.5.2017 whereby the application filed by the defendant was dismissed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Dera Bassi.

(2.) Few facts are essential. The plaintiff filed a suit seeking declaration that she was the owner in possession of 5/320 share in the land fully detailed in the heading of the plaint and the sale deeds in respect of her share and the subsequent mutations entered on the basis of sale deeds were illegal and not binding upon her. She also sought a decree for injunction restraining the defendants from dispossessing her or raising any construction over the property in dispute.

(3.) The defendants filed an application seeking directions to the plaintiff to affix the ad valorem Court fee which has been dismissed by the lower Court relying upon 'Suhrid Singh alias Sardool Singh v. Randhir Singh and others 2010(2) CCC 510 (SC)'. Para 6 of the order reads as under:-