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

2010 Supreme(MP) 845

N.K.MODY
Narayanprasad – Appellant
Versus
Jagdish – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
V.P. Saraf for petitioner.

ORDER

1. Being aggrieved by the order dated 27 .9.10 passed by Civil Judge, Class-II, Dhar in Civil Suit No. 38-A/10 whereby the application filed by respondent Nos. 1,3,4 & 5 under order VII Rule 11 CPC was allowed and the petitioner was directed to pay the requisite court fee, present petition has been filed.

2. Short facts of the case are that the petitioner filed a suit for declaration, partition, possession and mesne profit alleging that the respondent No.3 is the mother of petitioner, while respondents No.1 & 2 and 4 & 5 are the brothers and sisters respectively. It was alleged that the land bearing survey Nos. 113/1, 113/2, 113/2/1, 113/2/2, 113/2/3, 173, 210/1, 256/1, 401, 402/1, 403/2, 404, 419/1 and 419/3 are the land which came into the share of Hiralal in partition, of which the land revenue is Rs. 81.80, in which petitioner is having 1/6th share. It was alleged that for the purpose of court fee, the suit is valued on the basis of which 1/6th of the land revenue of Rs. 81.80 multiplied by 20 i.e. 272.06 of which the court fee of Rs. 100/- is paid. Upon notice an application was filed by the respondents No.1, 3, 4 & 5 wherein it was alleged that the suit has not properly b












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