Honble RATHORE, J.– This writ petition is directed against the order dated 22.9.2004 by which, the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge No. 3, Jaipur City, Jaipur in Suit No. 126/2003 titled as Vilam Chand vs. Mohkam Chand & Ors. allowed the application dated 15.3.2004 moved under Sections 11, 18, 24, 29 & 38 of the Rajasthan Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act, 1961 (for short `the Act) read with Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure and the plaintiff was directed to deposit Rs. 7,00,000/- lakhs and the issue for determination of the actual suit value was left open with the observation that it shall be decided after considering the evidence adduced on behalf of the parties and in case additional court fees required to be deposited, same shall be requisitioned from the plaintiffs- respondents.

(2). The impugned order dated 22.9.2004 was challenged by the petitioners on the ground that the plaintiff-respondent No.2 before the learned Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Div.) No. 3, Jaipur City, Jaipur in the year 1997 for cancellation of sale deed and possession of the property alleging that the sale deed was executed by fraud and he has executed mortgage deed and, therefore,

Click Here to Read the rest of this document