RAJENDRA PRASAD ATHGHARA Vs. CHANDRA CHUR CHOUDHARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AFTER hearing learned counsel for the parties on the question of maintainability, i +find that this Civil Revision is maintainable and it is held so.

(2.) THIS Civil Revision is directed against the order dated 4.3.2002, by which the court below rejected the prayer of the defendant -petitioners to reject the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short 'the Code ') on the ground that the proper court fee has not been paid on the plaint.

(3.) THERE is no dispute that one Shiru Chaudhary had two sons, namely, Lal Babu Choudhary and Jagdambi Choudhary. Jagdambi Choudhary had two sons, namely, plaintiff Chandrachur Choudhary and Muni Lal Choudhary. Muni Lal Choudhary had a wife -Tara Devi and a daughter - Sudha Devi. According to the plaintiff, Sudha Devi died issueless, whereas, according to the defendants, she died leaving behind three daughters, namely, Rashmi Singh, Rohini Singh and Vidya Shree (Arrayed as defendant 2nd party). According to the plaintiff, common ancestor Shiru Choudhary acquired properties at different places. The property acquired in the name of Lal Babu Choudhary was a joint family property. The property in suit was also acquired in the name of Lal Babu Choudhary which stood situated in the town of Khagaria and which was also a part of the joint family property. It was decided that Lal Babu Choudhary would later on execute a sale -deed in favour of the family members of Jagdambi Choudhary. After the death of Jagdambi Choudhary, Muni Lal Choudhary became the Karta of the family and he got a sale -deed executed by said Lal Babu Choudhary in the name of his wife Tara Devi. Thereafter, there was a family arrangement with regard to the properties stood in the name of the plaintiff 'sbrother Muni Lal Choudhary and it was decided that Muni Lal Choudhary and his wife Tara Devi would utilise the property during their life time and the ownership of the same would remain with the plaintiff. It was further stated that Muni Lal Choudhary and Tara Devi relinquished their interest in the suit property in favour of the plaintiff. Thereafter, the plaintiff became the owner of the property and has been paying municipal taxes and getting municipal receipts. Daughter of Muni Lal Choudhary and Tara Devi, namely, Sudha Devi also died issueless, but defendant no. 1, who was a tenant in the premises, got a sale -deed executed by fictitious ladies, who are defendants 6, 7 and 8 in the suit, by claiming that they are the legal heirs of the share of Muni Lal Choudhary and Tara Devi and hence the suit.