140 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 14.01.2026 RUR SINGH ....Petitioner Versus SHAKTI SINGH AND OTHERS ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN Present : Mr. G.C. Shahpuri, Advocate for the petitioner.

PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL)

Challenge is to the order dated 15.12.2025 passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division), Yamuna Nagar whereby on an application filed by the defendants under Order VII Rule 11 CPC petitioner/plaintiff has been ordered to pay ad valorem Court fee in terms of Section 7(v) of the Court Fees Act, 1870 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the 1870 Act’).

2. Petitioner/plaintiff is a lessor, who has filed the present suit against lessee seeking decree of mandatory injunction in form of direction to the defendant(s)/lessee to hand-over physical possession for having defaulted in payment of lease money.

3. Mr. Shahpuri submits that the Trial Court erred in relying upon Section 7(v) of the 1870 Act without considering Section 7(xi) of the 1870 Act.

4. Having heard Mr. Shahpuri and after carefully perusing the records of the case, this Court finds that the impugned order passed by the Trial Court needs to be modified.

5. Section 7(v) and Section 7(xi) of the 1870 Act, read as under:

“7. Computation of fees payable in certain suits.—The amount of fee payable under this Act in the suits next hereinafter mentioned shall be computed as follows:—

xxx xxx xxx for possession of land, houses and gardens.—(v) In suits for the possession of land, houses and gardens—according to the value of the subject-matter; and such value shall be deemed to be—

where the subject-matter is land, and—

(a) where the land forms an entire estate, or a definite share of an estate, paying annual revenue to Government, or forms part of such an estate and is recorded in the Collector’s register as separately assessed with such revenue, and such revenue is permanently settled— ten times the revenue so payable:

(b) where the land forms an entire estate, or a definite share of an estate, paying annual revenue to Government, or forms part of such estate and is recorded as aforesaid;

and such revenue is settled, but not permanently— five times the revenue so payable:

(c) where the land pays no such revenue, or has been partially exempted from such payment, or is charged with any fixed payment in lieu of such revenue, and nett profits have arisen from the land during the year next before the date of presenting the plaint—

fifteen times such nett profits:

but where no such nett profits have arisen therefrom— the amount at which the Court shall estimate the land with reference to the value of similar land in the neighbourhood :

(d) where the land forms part of an estate paying revenue to Government, but is not a definite share of such estate and is not separately assessed as above-mentioned—the market-

value of the land:

xxx xxx xxx between landlord and tenant.— (xi) In the following suits between landlord and tenant:—

(a) for the delivery by a tenant of the counterpart of a lease, (b) to enhance the rent of a tenant having a right of occupancy, (c) for the delivery by a landlord of a lease, [(cc) for the recovery of immovable property from a tenant, including a tenant holding over after the determination of a tenancy,]

(d) to contest a notice of ejectment, (e) to recover the occupancy of [immovable property] from which a tenant has been illegally ejected by the landlord, and (f) for abatement of rent—

according to the amount of the rent of the [immovable property] to which the suit refers, payable for the year next before the date of presenting the plaint.

6. The present suit being a suit filed by the lessor against lessee, the same has to be governed by Section 7(xi) and not by Section 7(v). Meaning thereby, the plaintiff is required to pay ad valorem Court fee on the annual rental value and not on value of the property in terms of Section 7(xi)

(cc).

7. With the aforesaid modification in the impugned order, the revision petition is dis