LAXMAN SINGH Vs. KAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this revision petition, the defendant petitioners (Laxman Singh and Shivnarain Singh) have assailed the judgment dated 17.2.2001 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (SD) Sawaimadhopur decreeing the plaintiff respondent's Civil Suit seeking relief under Section 6 of Specific Relief Act, 1963 (for short 'the Act') for dispossession of the defendants from the suit property.

(2.) IN the suit, a decree was sought by the plaintiff on the assertions that the defendant Nos. 1 and 2 (present petitioners) had dispossessed forcibly on the intervening night of 11th and 12th July, 1996. This suit was contested by asserting in the written statement inter -alia that the suit property has since been valued at more than Rs. 30,000/ -, the Court of Munsif where the plaintiff had filed suit on 21st July, 1976, had no jurisdiction and accordingly while deciding such an objection vide order dated 8th January, 1980 the Munsif Sawaimadhopur returned the aforesaid suit to the plaintiff for being presented to the competent court, and pursuant thereto the plaintiff presented this suit on 18th January, 1980 before the District Judge Sawaimadhopur under Section 9 of the Act for dispossession of the defendants, to which the defendants again filed written statement on 20th May, 1980, denying the averments made by the plaintiffs in their plaint. On the basis of the pleadings six issues were framed. Plaintiff examined seven witnesses in support of their pleadings and produced documentary evidence (Ex.1 to Ex.20). Contrarily, the defendants (petitioners) examined 17 witnesses and produced documentary evidence (Ex.D -1 to 13) apart from other Exhibits A1 to A10. However, on 18.12.1992 since the suit was transferred by the District Judge, Sawaimadhopur to the Court of Munsif, Sawaimadhopur, who by his judgment dated 17.10.1996 dismissed the suit against which, the plaintiff had preferred a revision petition before this Court. This Court while allowing that revision had set aside dismissal of the suit and remanded the matter back to the trial court for decision of the suit in the light of provisions of Section 6 of the Act. Upon remand to the Civil Judge (JD), Sawaimadhopur, the suit was taken up but before commencement of hearing the learned District Judge vide his order dated 1.11.2000 transferred the suit to the court of Civil Judge (SD), Sawaimadhopur, who in turn decreed the plaintiffs suit by the impugned judgment. Hence this revision.

(3.) PER Contra, Shri Dalip Singh learned Counsel on behalf of the respondents has contended that this revision petition being properly valued and paid with court fee as per schedule -II of Rajasthan Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act, 1961 and as per Article 11(p) of the aforesaid Sch -II, Rs. 10/ - is the prescribed court fee for the revision petition presented to the High Court under -Section 115 C.P.C., or under the provisions of any other Act, arising out of a suit or proceeding if the value of suit exceeds Rs. 1000/ -. Hence, according to Mr. Dalip Singh, a revision petition is maintainable and cannot be dismissed for want of not properly valued or paid with court fees.