SEEMA Vs. SHIVPYARI CHOUDHARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are plaintiffs of the Civil Original Suit No.127/2018. The defendant-respondents appeared in the said suit and filed their written statement-cum-counter claim. The plaintiff-petitioners raised objection that the counter claim has been under-valued; unless the defendants correct the valuation of counter claim to the tune of Rs.15,00,000.00, the counter claim is not maintainable. Therefore, prayer was made to ask the defendants to raise the valuation and pay the court fee accordingly, consistent with the requirement of Sec. 11 of the Rajasthan Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961. The plaintiffpetitioners further prayed that in the event of default, the plaint be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. Vide impugned order dtd. 25/8/2023, the Court below has rejected the prayer of the plaintiff-petitioners. The Court below noticed the judgments of this Court in Smt. Cheina and Ors. Vs Nirbhay Singh reported in RLW 1997 (1) Raj. 688 as well as Smt. Geeta Devi Vs Shri Gopal Krishan Vashistha and Anr. reported in RLW 1996 (1) Raj. 460 in support of its view that the question is a mixed question of law and fact and can be decided only after evidence as one of the issues.

(2.) Learned counsel for the plaintiff-petitioners submits that the Court below has acted against the mandate of law contained in Sec. 11 of the Rajasthan Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961 and judgment of this Court in Mokham Chand Dasot & Anr Vs ADJ 3 Jaipur City reported in 2006 (3) RLW 1858.

(3.) The provision of Sec. 11 of Rajasthan Court Fees and Suits Valuation reads as follows:-