BIJENDER SINGH Vs. CHAND SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT revision petition is directed against the order passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Rohtak allowing an application moved by the defendant-respondents under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short the Code).

(2.) PLAINTIFFS filed a suit seeking a decree for possession by way of partition and permanent injunction on the allegations that Manohar Lal son of Hazari was the absolute owner of the property in question which was earlier part of Rect. No. 36 Killa No. 17/1. He died on 1.7.1998 and his estate was inherited and succeeded by his sons and daughters. The petitioner claims that he inherited the said property to the extent of 1/28th share. Thus, all the co-sharers are in joint possession.

(3.) IT was the contention of the defendant-respondents that by way of present plaint there is challenge to the sale deeds dated 28.8.2003 and 3.6.2005 and therefore the plaintiffs were required to pay ad valorem court fee. The petitioner, on the other hand claims that no ad valorem court fee was required as the basic relief claimed by the petitioner is for a declaration and cancellation of the sale deed and setting aside of decree is a consequential relief arising therefrom.