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

2011 Supreme(MP) 544

N.K.MODY
Harinarayan – Appellant
Versus
Gulabchandra – Respondent


JUDGMENT

N.K. Mody, J.

1. Being aggrieved by the order dated 1-10-10 passed by Civil Judge, Class 11, Sitamhow in Civil Suit No. 116-A/08, whereby learned Trial Court directed the Petitioner to pay ad valorem Court fee on the market value of the suit property, present petition has been filed.

2. Short facts of the case are that the Petitioner filed a suit for declaration to the effect that the sale deed dated 11-6-08 executed by Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in favour of Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 be declared void so far as it relates to the share of Petitioner and also permanent injunction. The suit was contested by the Respondent Nos. 3 and 4, who have purchased the property from Respondent Nos. 1 and 2, wherein it was alleged that the Petitioner cannot challenge the validity of the sale deed unless and until Petitioner pays the ad valorem Court fee. It was alleged that the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 sold the property to Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 for a consideration of Rs. 5,51,000/-, therefore, Petitioner is liable to pay ad valorem Court fee. It was prayed that the Petitioner be directed to pay ad valorem Court fee on the amount of sale deed. The application filed by Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 und




















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