KEDAR AGARWAL Vs. RAJKUMAR AGARWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Under challenge in this writ petition is the order dated 19.04.2017 whereby, the Court of learned Additional District Judge No.20, Jaipur Metropolitan Headquarter, Chomu has, while partly allowing the application filed by the respondents-defendants No.11 & 12 under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, directed the petitioners-plaintiffs to pay Court fee as per Section 24(b) of the Rajasthan Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act , 1961 (for short "the Act of 1961").

(2.) The facts in brief are that the petitioners-plaintiffs filed a suit for partition, declaration to the effect that the three sale deeds executed by the defendants No.1 to 7 in favour of defendants No.8 to 10 are null and void against their rights, mesne profit and permanent injunction. An application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC came to be filed by the defendants No.11 & 12 with the averments that the plaintiffs were not in possession of the property in question, no cause of action has arisen to them and the Court fee paid was insufficient. The aforesaid application has partly been allowed by the learned trial Court vide its order dated 19.04.2017.

(3.) Assailing the order dated 19.04.2017, learned counsel for the petitioners contended that being stranger to the sale deeds, they were not required to pay Court fee on market value of the property and, as a matter of fact, provisions of Section 24(e) were applicable in the present case and not of Section 24 (b) of the Act of 1961 and the Court fee paid by them was sufficient. Learned counsel relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court of India in case of Suhrid Singh @ Sardool Singh versus Randhir Singh & Ors. reported in 2010 DNJ (SC) 632 and judgment of a Coordinate Bench of this Court in case of Jagdish Sahu versus Sonu reported in 2017 (3) WLC (Raj.) 65.