SUMITRA DEVI Vs. PUSHKAR NARAYAN AND ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant Smt. Sumitra Devi against the judgment and decree dated 23.4.2013 passed by the learned Additional District Judge (Fast Track) No. 1, Pali in Civil Appeal Decree No. 21/2008 whereby the learned Appellate Court reversed the order dated 12.11.2008 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), Jaitaran in Civil Original Case No. 28/1993.

(2.) Facts in brief are that the respondents filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction in the Court of learned Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), Jaitaran. The suit property was valued at 40,000/- and accordingly the Court fees was paid on-the said valuation. It appears that the defendant (appellant herein) sold the suit property during the pendency of the suit and accordingly, the plaintiffs (respondents herein) filed an application for amendment in the plaint and sought the relief of cancellation of the sale deed executed on 5.6.2006. Upon the amendment being sought, the petitioner defendant filed an application under Order 7, Rule 11 read with Section .151 C.P.C. raising an objection that as the sale deed which was challenged by way of the amendment was for an amount of 1 lac, the Court of the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Div.) seized to have the monetary jurisdiction to try the suit. The application came to be decided by the learned Trial Court by judgment dated 12.11.2008 and the objection regarding lack of the Court's jurisdiction to try the suit was sustained and the suit was directed to be returned back to the plaintiff for being presented before the Appropriate Court. The respondent No. 1 plaintiff filed an appeal against the said judgment and decree. The Appellate Court by judgment dated 23.4.2012 accepted the appeal holding chat the valuation of suit would not be altered by the subsequent events i.e. the subsequent sale by the defendant and despite the amendment permitted to challenge the sale deed. Accordingly, the appeal was accepted and the judgment passed by the Trial Court was set aside.

(3.) The appellant defendant has approached the Court by way of the instant appeal challenging the judgment and decree passed by the Appellate Court.