Lala Ram vs Smt. Vidya Wati @ Vidya Devi

Satish Kumar Mittal, J.—This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been field by the defendant for setting aside the order dated 18.11.2005, passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division) Faridabad, whereby his application for rejecting the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C. has been dismissed.

In this case, Smt. Vidya Wati alias Vidya Devi, respondent herein, filed a suit for declaration with consequential relief on injunction. She claimed herself to be owner and in possession of the land in question. In the suit, she has also challenged the award dated 17.1.2004, passed in the Lok Adalat in Civil Suit No. II, titled Lala Ram v. Smt. Vidyawati on the ground that the said award was got procured by the defendant on the basis of fraud and mis-representation and the same is not binding on her rights. The defendant, after appearance in the said suit, filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C. for rejecting the plaint on the ground that the plaintiff has not affixed the proper court fee on the plaint. The learned trial Court dismissed the said application while observing that case of the plaintiff falls within the provisions of Section 7(iv)(c) read with Section 7(v)(b) of the Court Fees. Act, 1870 and the plaintiff is required to affix the Court fee ten times the land revenue assessed in respect of the land in question. Since the plaintiff had affixed the Court fee of Rs. 26/-, therefore, she was directed to make good the deficiency in the Court which shall be ten time the land revenue assessed on the land in question. The prayer made by the petitioner for paying the Court fee on the ad volorem value has been declined.

After hearing counsel for the petitioner and going through the impugned order, I do not find any illegality in the impugned order.

Dismissed.