Plaintiffs are required to seek cancellation of the sale-deed and pay ad valorem court-fees based on the value of the property mentioned in the sale-deed.

ORDER :

Vivek Rusia, J.

1. Petitioners/defendants have filed the present petition being aggrieved by the order dated 4.5.2019 whereby application filed under Order 7, Rule 11 of C.P.C. has been dismissed.

Facts of the case are as under:-

2. Respondent Nos. 1 to 8 being the plaintiffs filed the suit for declaration, permanent injunction, possession and means profit against the present petitioners/defendants. Shobharam had a son - Mansharam and daughter -Mathurabai. The plaintiffs are sons and daughters of Mathurabai, who got married with Chhogalal in Village Bamnala, Tehsil Bhikangaon, District Khargone. She died on 9.1.2002. Mansharam got married to Smt. Shantabai and both died issueless. Mansharam was the owner of land bearing Survey No. 7/2/1 area 1.902 Hect. land revenue 17.38 Paise, out of which, he sold 0.010 Hect. of land to Badribai and remained owner of balance land i.e. 1.892 Hect. (hereinafter referred to as "the suit land") till his death. He was also the owner of the house, but he donated the same during his lifetime. According to the plaintiffs, after the death of Mansharam and Shantabai, being the sons of Smt. Mathurabai, they have become the owner of the suit land by way of succession. Shantabai died on 14.7.2017 and the plaintiffs performed all the rights and rituals. According to the plaintiffs, defendants No. 1 and 2 based on forged Will of Mansharam got mutated their name in the revenue record. The plaintiffs objected but the Tehsildar passed the order in their favour. Thereafter, they preferred an appeal but the same has been dismissed vide order dated 9.10.2018, against which the appeal is pending before the Additional Commissioner. After mutation, defendant Nos. 1 and 2, have sold the suit land to defendant vide registered sale-deed dated 24.8.2018. The plaintiffs filed the suit claiming a declaration that they are the exclusive owner of the suit land and the sale-deed dated 24.8.2018 is void and not binding on them and defendants be directed to handover the possession of the suit land to them and the respondents be further restrained not to alienate the suit land.

3. The petitioners/defendants appeared and filed a reply to the application for the temporary injunction. Thereafter, they also filed an application under Order 7, Rule 11 of C.P.C. seeking rejection of the plaint on the ground that the plaintiffs have not properly valued the suit and liable to pay ad valorem court-fees as per the value of the suit land as per sale-deed. The application was opposed by the plaintiffs and vide order dated 4.5.2019, learned trial Court has rejected the application, hence the present petition before this Court.

4. Shri Aniket Naik, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/defendants, has submitted that according to the plaintiffs, the suit land is an ancestral property jointly owned by Mansharam and Mathurabai. After the death of Mansharam and his wife - Shantabai, the plaintiffs being legal heirs of Mathurabai are entitled to get the suit land under succession. Thus, the plaintiffs are claiming the right over the suit land by way of succession through their mother - Mathurabai, therefore, sale-deed dated 24.8.2018 is binding on them. Even if they are not party or executant of the sale-deed, they are bound by such document and the relief to the effect that the sale-deed is void, amounts to the relief of cancellation of the sale-deed, hence they are liable to pay court-fees as per the value of the property mentioned in the sale-deed. Learned trial Court has wrongly placed reliance over the judgment of Apex Court in the case of Surhid Singh v. Randhirsingh, AIR 2010 SC 2807, in which, the Apex Court has considered the provisions of Court Fees Act, as amended by the Government of Punjab, but such an amendment is not applicable in the State of M.R Hence, by virtue of Section 7(iv), the plaintiffs are liable to pay ad valorem Court-fees as they are seeking consequential relief of cancellation of sale-deed dated 24.8.2018