Back
DEEPAK GUPTA
Naveen Chaudhary – Appellant
Versus
Harsh Chaudhary – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Mr. Deepak Gupta, J.
Plaintiff (petitioner herein) and defendant (respondent herein) are husband and wife. They are in litigation before Family Court, Faridabad.
2.1 Petitioner is aggrieved by an order dated 12.04.2024 (Annexure P1) passed by ld. Principal Judge, Family Court, Faridabad, whereby in an application moved by the respondent under Order 7, Rule 11 CPC for rejection of the plaint, he has been asked to pay ad valorem Court fee on the property in question.
2.2 Subject matter of the suit is a residential house, which was purchased on 12.01.2001 in the name of petitioner and respondent in the ratio of 50:50. It was sold by both of them to raise funds to construct a school vide sale deed dated 19.01.2009, but later on, the suit property was again purchased by them in the ratio of 50:50 by way of sale deed dated 13.02.2014 for consideration of Rs. 1,50,00,000/-. Claiming that he is the exclusive owner of the suit property and that he had paid the entire sale consideration for repurchasing of the same in 2014, but out of love and affection, the name of his wife-respondent was also inserted in the sale deed, petitioner-plaintiff sought a declaration to that effect. He al
The court clarified that a plaintiff seeking a declaration of ownership must pay ad valorem court fee only on the portion of the property they seek to annul, not the entire value.
The court clarified that a non-executant must pay ad valorem court fees for declaring a sale deed void, capped at Rs.1,50,000 under the Madhya Pradesh Amendment.
The relief sought for annulment of sale deeds and declaration of ownership required ad valorem Court fee.
Executants of sale deeds seeking annulment must pay ad valorem Court fee based on total consideration, as opposed to non-executants seeking mere declarations.
plaintiff filed the suit for declaration that the sale deeds were fabricated and therefore, were void. Considering the provisions of Tamil Nadu Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act, it was held that sui....
A non-executant plaintiff seeking declaration and possession must pay court fees under Sections 7(iv)(c) and 7(v) of the Court Fees Act, not based on the transfer deed's market value.
Non-executants in a suit challenging sale deeds based on allegations of fraud are not required to pay ad-valorem court fees, establishing a distinction from executants.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of court fee payable in a suit for declaration of joint ownership and consequential relief of possession, where the sale deeds ar....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
