SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(P&H) 1501

AVNEESH JHINGAN
Hajra – Appellant
Versus
Yakoob – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr. Saleem Ahmed

JUDGMENT :

Avneesh Jhingan, J.

The present revision petition is at the instance of the plaintiffs challenging the impugned order dated 4.11.2016 passed by Civil Judge, (Junior Divison), Mewat. Vide said order, an application under Order 7 Rule 11 (d) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short 'CPC') was decided holding that the plaintiffs have to pay ad-volerum Court fee on the market value of the suit property.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners challenged the said order on the ground that though the suit was filed for possession and mandatory injunction but infact it was a suit under the Specific Relief Act, 1963 (for short 'the Act') and therefore, no ad-volerum court fee had to be paid.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon Section 6 (2) of the Act, to state that since the suit has been filed within six months of the date of dispossession, therefore, the suit is under Section 6 of the Act. The brief facts are that as per the petitioner, the plaintiffs are relatives and they jointly owned the suit property on which they constructed a boundary wall in the year 2014. It is alleged that the defendants raised construction in the middle of the land on which they had







Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top