1. Petitioner has filed the present petition being aggrieved by the order dated 30.7.2014 by which he has been directed to properly value the suit and pay the court-fees under section 8 of the Suits Valuation Act.

2. Petitioner/plaintiff filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction. It is contended that defendants No.1 and 2 entered into an agreement to sell with plaintiff the agricultural land bearing Survey No.683/2, area 1.024 hectares situated at Gram Digtan, Tahsil and District Dhar. On 4.6.2000 as per the terms of the sale agreement, an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- was paid by the plaintiff and possession was obtained and since then the plaintiff is in possession over the suit land and cultivating the same. The balance amount was paid on 21.4.2001 but the sale deed could not be executed on the assurance given by the defendant No.2. The possession continued for a period of 13 years, therefore, plaintiff has acquired the title by way of adverse possession. On 11.6.2013 defendants started interfering with the possession of the plaintiff and tried to evict him from the suit property, therefore, cause of action arose for filing the suit. Later on plaintiff came to know that defendants No.1 and 2 has sold the said land to defendant No.3 by way of registered sale deed dated 30.3.2013. In the suit plaintiff prayed the reliefs that he be declared owner on the basis of adverse possession and the sale deed dated 30.3.2013 be declared as void and not binding on the plaintiff. The plaintiff has valued the suit for the purpose of pecuniary jurisdiction 20 times to the land revenue i.e. Rs.196/-, Rs.2,75,000/- on the basis of agreement to sell, for the purpose of declaration he has valued the suit at Rs.1,000/- and permanent injunction at Rs.1,000/- and paid fix court-fees.

3. After notice respondents appeared and raised the objection about valuation and payment of court-fees by way of an application under Order 7 rule 11 CPC. It is submitted by defendant No.3 that there is no basis to value the suit at Rs.2,75,000/- and proper court-fee has not been paid as the plaintiff has challenged the sale deed of defendant No.3 which is valued at Rs.61 lacs, therefore, the suit is liable to be valued at Rs.61 lacs. The said application was opposed by the plaintiff and submitted that on the basis of the relief claimed he has properly valued the suit and prayed for rejection of the application.

4. That the learned trial Court vide order dated 30.7.2014 has held that the plaintiff has failed to explain on what basis he has valued the suit at Rs.2,75,000/- and the application filed by the defendant No.3 was allowed and plaintiff was directed to value the suit as per section 8 of the Suits Valuation Act, 1887 and pay proper court-fees.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

6. It is true that plaintiff is free to value his suit according to his choice but so far as the payment of court-fees is concerned, section 7 of the Indian Court-fees Act would apply. Plaintiff filed the suit for declaration and permanent injunction. The plaintiff is seeking declaration that he declared owner by virtue of adverse possession. The land is admittedly agricultural land, therefore, he is required to value the suit 20 time to the land revenue and liable to pay the ad-valorem court-fees which the plaintiff has valued at Rs.196/-. The plaintiff has not filed the suit for specific performance of the agreement dated 23.4.2001, therefore, he is not required to value the suit at Rs.2,75,000/- which was the value of the agreement, therefore, trial Court has rightly come to the conclusion that without any basis plaintiff has valued the suit at Rs.2,75,000/-. The Full Bench of this Court in the case of Sunil s/o Dev Kumar Radhelia and others v. Awadh Narayan and others, reported in 2011(1) JLJ 71=2010(4) MPLJ 431, has held that if the plaintiff makes an allegation that the instrument is void and hence not binding on him then he not required to pay the ad valo