JAI PAL SINGH Vs. MADHO SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An interesting question of law has been raised by way of a preliminary objection to the maintainability of the present Letters Patent Appeal.

(2.) The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration with a consequential relief of injunction. The learned Single Judge of this court, to whom the suit was assigned, found that the plaintiff had not paid advalorem court fee and that the court fee paid was inadequate. The learned Single Judge allowed three weeks time to the Plaintiff to make up the deficiency in the court fee failing which, it was directed that 'Plaint shall stand rejected without further reference to the court.' The plaintiff did not make up the deficiency in the court fee and instead filed a L P A, against the order of the learned Single Judge, vide which rejection of the plaint on failure to make up the deficiency of court fee had been directed.

(3.) Mr. K. N. Raina, learned counsel for the defendant-respondent, has raised a preliminary objection to the maintainability of the letters Patent Appeal. It is urged that the impugned order of the learned Single Judge is a decree as it is an order passed under Order 7 Rule 11 C. P, C. and the plaintiff should have filed a regular first appeal against the decree, after paying proper court fee, and that a Letters Patent Appeal is not Competent against an order under Order 7 Rule 11 C. P. C.