Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
VIKRAM AGGARWAL
Jagat Singh – Appellant
Versus
Himmat Singh (Deceased) through his LRs – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
VIKRAM AGGARWAL , J.
1. The present petition, preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, assails the order dated 10.11.2021 (Annexure P-1), passed by the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Patiala, vide which the application filed by the respondents-defendants under Order VII Rule XI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short ‘CPC’) was allowed and the petitioner-plaintiff was directed to affix ad valorem court fee as per the value of the suit property.
2. The facts, as emanating from the revision petition, are that the petitioner-plaintiff (Jagat Singh) instituted a suit for declaration to the effect that he was the owner to the extent of 1/3rd share of the suit land (fully described in the plaint), situated in Village Roshanpur, Tehsil Dudhan Sadhan, District Patiala. A further declaration was also sought that the transfer of ownership deed dated 27.10.2014 executed by defendant No.1 in favour of defendant No.2 as regards the suit land was illegal, null and void and was liable to be cancelled. Relief of possession as regards the suit land was also sought alongwith consequential relief of permanent injunction.
3. During the pendency of the suit, an
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.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of ad valorem Court fee for challenging a transfer deed, which is determined based on the consideration shown in the deed and the p....
Executants of sale deeds seeking annulment must pay ad valorem Court fee based on total consideration, as opposed to non-executants seeking mere declarations.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of court fee for agricultural land and the distinction between seeking annulment of a deed and seeking a declaration that the dee....
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.
Non-executant plaintiffs challenging validity of sale deeds must pay ad valorem court fees due to lack of possession.
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....
Plaintiffs, as executants of sale deeds, are required to seek cancellation of the deeds and affix ad-valorem court-fee as per the sale consideration mentioned in the deeds, even when seeking a declar....
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
