IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 13.11.2025 Rajan Sharma ...... Petitioner versus Alka Thakur and others ...... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN Present: Mr. Vikas Kumar Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Vinod Kumar, Advocate for respondents No.1 to 5.

****

PANKAJ JAIN, J. (Oral)

1. Challenge is to the order dated 01.03.2023 passed by Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Mukerian, whereby on an application filed by defendant under Order VII Rule 11 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, plaintiff-petitioner has been ordered to pay ad-valorem Court fee on the sale consideration of the sale deeds challenged in the suit.

2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that it is not a case wherein the possession is being claimed. Rather the case of the plaintiff pleaded in the plaint is that he be declared to be owner in possession of the suit land declaring various transfer deeds qua the suit land to be illegal, null and void. Reliance is being placed upon judgment passed by Supreme Court in ‘Suhrid Singh @ Sardool Singh vs. Randhir Singh and others’ 2010 AIR (SC) 2807 and Civil Revision No.5213 of 2013 titled as ‘Dharambir and others vs. Sohan Lal and others’

decided on 03.11.2015.

3. After hearing counsel for the parties, this Court finds that the order passed by the Trial Court cannot be sustained. The prayer clause in the plaint reads as under:-

“It is therefore, prayed that the suit for declaration to the effect that the plaintiff and Performa defendant No. 10 and 11 are the owner in possession qua their equal share (7/88 out of total 13 1/2 marla property bearing Khata No. 461/607 Khasra No. 2470 (306) Had Bast No. 621 situated within the revenue estate of Village Bhavnour District Hoshiarpur and owner in possession of house property qua their equal share in house property measuring 14 marla bearing Khata No. 36/42 Khasra No. 699 (4-12) Abadi and Khata No. 37/43 Khasra No. 70C (1-0) duly show red in color in the site plan and marked as ABCDEF situated within the revenue estate of Village Ramgarh Sikri Tehsil Mukerian District Hoshiarpur and owner in possession of the property qua their share in the property measuring 112 kanal 13 Marla bearing Khata No. 362/497 Khasra No. 3018 (10-1), Khata No. 363/498 to 501, Khasra No. 2478 (2-), 2480 (3-8), 2481 (3-2), 2482 (1-4), 2531 (0-7), 2535 (0-6), 2537 (2-7), 2570 (11-5), 2579 (0-9), 2687)2-14), 2686 (1-16), 3005 (1-9), 3020 (48-4), 3023 (44- 11), 20-10, 24-1, 3022 (10-2), 3012 (2-1), Khata No. 364/502 Khasra No. 3019 (91-15) situated within the revenue estate of Village Bhavnour Tehsil Mukerian District Hoshiarpur And to the effect that the Gift deeds bearing document No. 337, 338, 339 dated 13.07.2000 and gift deeds bearing document No. 1110 dated 27.03.2001, document No. 193 dated 04.06.2001, document No. 456 dated 20.08.2001 executed by Ram Parkash @ Om Parkash son of Tulsi Ram son of Sunder and others registered in the office of Joint Sub Registrar, Talwara Distric Hoshiarpur qua the share of Ram Parkash Om Parash in favour of D.A.V college Managing Committee, Hoshiarpur i.e. defendant No.6 qua the property mentioned in first part of the head note of the plaint, is null, void, sham and ineffective document and is liable to be set aside, further to the effect that sale deeds bearing document No. 165/1/1106 dated 31.01.2020 in respect of property measuring 0-13M-5Sarsahi executed by defendant No.6 in favor of deviendant No. 4 and 5 and sale deed bearing document No. 165/1/821 dateo 18.11.2019 and Sale deed bearing document No. 168/1/825 dated 18.11.2019 executed by defendant No.6 in favor of defendant No.1 to 3 are null and void, sham document having no effect on the legal right of the plaintiff and Performa defendant No.10 and 11 and the mutation sanctioned on the basis of alleged Gift deeds and alleged sale deeds are liable to be set aside/cancelled may kindly be decreed with cost in favour of plaintiff and against the defendant in the interest of