High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCR/20/2014disposed of

Sukhpal Singh & ANR v. Gurdeep Singh Grewal & ANR

2016-08-09Mr. Justice Fateh Deep Singh2 pages

CR No.20 of 2014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CR No.20 of 2014 Decided on: 09.08.2016 Sukhpal Singh and another ....Petitioners

Versus

Gurdeep Singh and another ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE REKHA MITTAL Present :

Mr. Gurcharan Dass, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. T.P.S. Makkar, Advocate for respondent No.1.

Mr. Karamjit Verma, Advocate for respondent No.2.

REKHA MITTAL, J.

The present petition has been directed against order dated 08.11.2013 passed by the Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Ludhiana whereby application filed under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short 'CPC') for rejection of plaint for want of payment of requisite Court fee has been disposed of with a direction that the petitioners are liable to pay ad valorem Court fee as provided under Section 7(iv)(c) of the Court Fees Act (in short 'the Act').

It is an undisputed position of the case that the petitioners have directed challenge against two sale deeds detailed in sub-paras (i) and (ii) of the headnote of the impugned order. The learned trial Court by relying upon judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India "Suhrid Singh @ Sardool Singh vs Randhir Singh and others", 2010(2) RCR (Civil) 564, has held that as the plaintiffs are non-executants seeking Mohd. Yakub 2016.08.11 12:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CR No.20 of 2014 declaration that the sale deed are invalid and further seeking consequential relief of possession, they are liable to pay ad valorem Court fee as provided under Section 7(iv)(c) of the Act. When the facts and circumstances of the present case are examined in the light of enunciation of law laid down in Suhrid Singh @ Sardool Singh's case (supra), I do not find any error much less illegality in the impugned order directing the petitioners to pay Court fee as provided under Section 7(iv)(c) of the Act, to be computed according to Section 7(v) of the Act.

In view of the above, the petition stands disposed of. 09.08.2016 (REKHA MITTAL) yakub JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No Mohd. Yakub 2016.08.11 12:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh