KAMAL ENG WORKS Vs. ASHWANI KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two revision petitions have been filed against the order dated 25-8-87 passed by the Addl. District Judge, Jaipur District, Jaipur, by the plaintiff, asking the plaintiff to file additional court fees. THESE two revisions arise out of similar facts and circumstances and involve common questions of law and therefore, are being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) THE plaintiff-petitioner filed two separate suits for specific performance of agreement dated 21. 3. 1983 and permanent injunction against the defendants, Before filing the written statement, the defendants filed separate applications u/s 11 of the Rajasthan Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'court Fees Act') and under Order 7 Rule 10 C. P. C. THE trial court decided these applications vide its impugned orders dated 25-8-1987 accepting the applications and asking the petitioner-plaintiff to pay the additional court fees. It is against these orders that the present revision petitions have been filed.

(3.) HE has further placed reliance on Mt. Rupia vs. Bhatu Mohton (7) wherein it had been observed that the Court has jurisdiction to revise the valuation put by the plaintiff in a suit to obtain a declaratory decree with consequential relief.