1. - The defendant has filed this revision petition against the order dated 4.11.2010, whereby his application under Order 7 Rule 11, C.P.C., was partly allowed by the learned Court below and the Court below has directed the plaintiffs to deposit the deficit Court fees in the Suit No. 125/2011, Smt. Tammu Devi & Ors. v. Shrawan Lal & Anr. , for cancellation of relinquishment deed and injunction filed by the plaintiffs-respondents Smt. Tamu Devi & Ors.

2. Learned counsel for the defendant-petitioner Mr. Ravi Bhansali urges that the plaint did not disclose any cause of action and, therefore, the application under Order 7 Rule 11, C.P.C., deserves to be allowed.

3. having heard learned counsel, this Court is satisfied that there is no force in the present revision petition as the question of cancellation of the relinquishment deed in question and injunction as per the plaint would give rise to several question of facts, which may have to be proved by the parties by leading the evidence. The question of Court fees however, has already been decided in favour of the defendant-petitioner and the plaintiffs-respondent have been asked to deposit the deficit Court fees. Filing of the present revision petition by the defendant-petitioner against the said order which is partly in his favour, cannot be appreciated.

4. There is no force in this revision petition. The same is, accordingly, dismissed. Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court and opposite party forthwith. No costs.Revision dismissed.

*******