Mandeep Kaur v. Kulwinder Singh And ORS

C.R. No.9185 of 2017 -1IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No.9185 of 2017 Date of Decision.01.11.2018 Mandeep Kaur ......Petitioner Vs Kulwinder Singh and others

...Respondents

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

Present:

Mr. Ramesh Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

-.- AMIT RAWAL J. (ORAL) The petitioner has assailed the impugned order dated 8.9.2017 whereby the application for rejection of plaint on account of non-payment of ad valorem court fee in the suit claiming joint possession of land measuring 12 kanals 18 1⁄2 marlas was disposed of and the petitioner-plaintiff was directed to make good the deficiency of court fee.

Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the Court below ought not to have disposed of the application by relying upon the Gazette Notification dated 7.1.2010 causing amendment by the Haryana Government in the Court Fee Act whereas it should have been ad valorem court fee.

I am afraid aforementioned argument of Mr. Sharma is not sustainable, for, as per the Court Fees (Punjab Second Amendment Act), 2009, in a suit filed for seeking declaration of title as a co-parcener, fee has been fixed as `500/-. In view of the aforementioned fact, I do not find any PANKAJ KUMAR 2018.11.16 12:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

C.R. No.9185 of 2017 -2illegality in the order passed by the Court below, much less, the same cannot be said to be passed without jurisdiction. The revision petition is dismissed.

(AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE November 01, 2018 Pankaj* Whether Reasoned/Speaking Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No PANKAJ KUMAR 2018.11.16 12:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document