I C v. ShingaraSingh82ot hers

dcfendant l rcspondentNo2 which I I as been inherit ed by defendant l Nt 2 Oom his forealers No alreadyt ransferred lhe I and inhcd by him from his fonfat hers 10 his t hree sons nam cly Darbara Singh Gurbachan Singh and respondentI defcndanl Nol 1I l equalshares Thc peioners and proform a defendant No j oint OWncrs and in j oint 01 t he I and from his falher Rauli who inhcrit ed t he Sllm e from his falhcr Nanda Sllll of Bllt lllI SingheSo in t his m anner t hc propert y I S ancest ral and coparcenary propcrly RespondcntNo2 t ransferred le suit I and t u respondcntNt vide salc deed N57 dat cd 070 1 11118illegallyiint l t t nlawfullyThe allcgedSlllc dccd is null and void and wil houl consideraon and wiout sll in favour I I f No1 llencet hc I m vingnyright o do prcsent suitWllS flled by 0 C I C5 I Z C I 08 71 I he pet i0001 Om Resj lndent sNo l and 2 m oved an applicion uilcr Order 7 Rulc11 CPC for rcj cct ionoft hc plaint ont he grt I undt hat ad valorem court fee has not been aI Tixed Oll t he plainlbyt hc TlI c I earned lrilil Ct liirl llfler hearingbot h t hc sides accept edt lie applicat ionu nder Seet it ln71iv1of Court s Fecs Act and direct ed t hc pI aint iffs10 pay I lle ilt l 11lI I I lrClllCOllrt leee I cclingd issat isflcd wit h t lw order dl1 17172009 passed by t he Clvil J ut lge 1unior DivisionlNab prcscnt rcVI SI I lI l pet it ionhas hren Oled by t he pct ioncrse I carncd counsel pet iI ionershas suI I m it t ed t hat Kum ar Suresh 2012.12.20 15: 18 True Scanned Copy of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh I SSlI C of paym cntof ad valorem court t he JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 45 Civil Revisit I n No571 of 2009 3 4 A I ll 11 ft I rm was pcndingbeft I rc t hc llivision Bench 01 I his Courl and t he sam e has been dcced in OvU Rewhn1 N22 f2009 OcMl I it led I I S I lara Singli I lSe GuI lall I l 4 ot hers on 0305211111Sllkccpingin vicwt he aut horit yof114111I llct I leAj lexCt Jllll in 5rill Singll111i1S04 1151 4S1gh 0nd om CA No281 113 01211111decided on 290321110whcrein il has been held by I heDivision Bench I hat ad vaI orem court fee is not reqI iiret lI o I le plI it le Soit I S conlendct l I hat t he im pugncdordcr legaland uiawful VI CW of I he t lccision of Division I 3ench and llonblc SuprellleCt llllt 118 det ailed above 1n replyt o abovc I earned counscl for t he subm it t rd t hal t hc order of I hc I rial court s j ust and I t I S furt hcr cont endcd t hat t he pct it ioncrswant t o avoid t he court fee on I hc groundt hal t he Sam e is rcsuI t of fraud and so t hey11 rC readyt o pay t he fee in aceordancc wit h t he sale deed I n aut hory sl 1 0 0 0 I O I Z r I 08 C 7 Qm 17Se80j i441Plt d 44140AI 8lC34 I hc I lonble Suprem eCt lt irl hlls held t llat wherc t he has been nlade by fat hcr necds t t l be avoided by l he Sot l a dcclarat oryform Thc ad valorem courl fec is I iable t 1Ihe paide hlive eonsidcred t he subm issionsm ade by I carned eounsel for bot h t he sides and have gone I hnI ught he rccords of llle caSee I I r delcrm inat ion of t he quest ionof Courl fcc t he nat ure oflhe suit and consequent ialrclieves are relcvanl The plainliffshave Olcd t he suifor declarat n t hal Kum ar Suresh 2012.12.20 15: 18 True Scanned Copy of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh I he pI aint Ts a1 proform nm dddantNo3 are j oint owncrsand t o Ule eNcct JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 46 Ciril Revisit I n Noe5571of2009 4 j oint possessionI n equalsharcs of I and m casuring5I 11I le1513 in khcwal No20 Khat auni Noe31 Kllllsril Nt le391 31 41N5 11 41 40161 4211 14301 11 144Jl 1453m 2114631 1471 163ll sit uat ed at villageJham hali Kluis 1ehsil Nahha I lislrict Pat iala as per j am abandifor t hc year 200121M12and t he sale t lced No857 daled 71 2008 exeeut cd bv defendanl Noa2 in 6111I urof defendant Nol and m ut aonNo258 lnclioncd on Ule blI sis of sale deed are iilegal null and void abnit io unlawful inoI lCrlllivenoncst and are t he result of fraud and 11nt 1nlll bint lingupt ln t he right sand clait ns t lf llle j liliit ilin qua t lt e I it rld not et l above and furt her t he revcnue cnt rics are I iable I o be eorrcet ed lll I he nit m es clf plaint f8and suit for perm anenlinuncfit ln t hc defcndant Nol ft m aI ienat in nsfcnin I g llr disposingof t he above said I and lcgall t o any llodyelse on t he basis of illegalent ries incorporat edin t he rcvenue record and sale decd 1 0 0 0 I Z r I 08 00 CL m cnt ioned ahove in any m anncr what soevere lhe Division Bcnch of t his Court I ll Civil Revision No22 of 2110908iMl t it led as D SinghscaseO hcld t hat whcre t here is a suit for declarat ion and t herc is no praycr for canccMat n ofsale deed in t hat casc ad valoreln court fec is not payableThe basisof t he siiid j udglnentof Division Bench is t he recent aut oriy of in Civil AppealNoe281 013of 2010 dccided on 2932010 I n t he prcscntCilSC 110 relief is soughtfor canceat ion t he sale dccd a nd as such t hc aut horit yof S7I am sher Ss C41url Kum ar Suresh 2012.12.20 15: 18 True Scanned is nol Copy of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh I r relicd upon by t hc t rial JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 47 Civil Revision Nt l5571 11f2009 5 Ay I n view of t he abovc discussion reVlSlOll pet it ionst ands and t he ordcr of t he t rial Court direct ingt hc plnint t o pay lld valoremcourt fce is hcld t o be legaland snds sct asi and I he t rial Court is direct ed t o gctt hc court fce paidaccordingt o t he scct ion 7ivlel read wit h Sect ion 7I l of of t he Court Fces Act wit h reference t o I he pI ainrsavcrm enlss A copy of t his j udgm entbe scnt t o t he t rial Court for st riet em pliances May2442010 SV 7 Y eJlJDGlll 1 0 0 t 0P I Z Q I C45 Oo 1 l 7 Kum ar Suresh 2012.12.20 15: 18 True Scanned Copy of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document