Smt. Prabha Rani Rajput (Deceased ... vs Pradeep Singh Rajput
2023 Latest Caselaw 2393 MP

                                                        1
                            IN    THE     HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                               AT JABALPUR
                                                    BEFORE
                                 HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GURPAL SINGH AHLUWALIA
                                           ON THE 10 th OF FEBRUARY, 2023
                                            MISC. PETITION No. 762 of 2023

                           BETWEEN:-
                           1.    SMT. PRABHA RANI RAJPUT, D/O LATE SHRI
                                 ASHOK KUMAR RAJPUT, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
                                 OCCUPATION-HOUSE      WIFE,     (DECEASED
                                 THROUGH HER LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE) (1)
                                 PAWAN KUMAR RAJPUT S/O LATE SHRI ASHOK
                                 KUMAR RAJPUT, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
                                 OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST R/O VILLAGE
                                 UMARIYA TEHSIL SARILA DISTRICT HARPALPUR
                                 (UTTAR PRADESH)

                           2.    HARIT KUMAR RAJPUT S/O LATE SHRI ASHOK
                                 KUMAR RAJPUT, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
                                 OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST R/O VILLAGE
                                 UMARIYA TEHSIL SARILA DISTRICT HARPALPUR
                                 (UTTAR PRADESH)

                           3.    SMT. VANDANA SINGH RAJPUT D/O LATE SHRI
                                 ASHOK KUMAR RAJPUT, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
                                 OCCUPATION: UNEMPLOYED R/O VILLAGE
                                 UMARIYA TEHSIL SARILA DISTRICT HARPALPUR
                                 (UTTAR PRADESH)

                                                                              .....PETITIONER
                           (BY SHRI SHAYAM YADAV- ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           1.    PRADEEP SINGH RAJPUT S/O SHRI BRIJENDRA
                                 SINGH RAJPUT, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O
                                 VILLAGE UMARIYA TEHSIL SARILA DSITRICT
                                 HARPALPUR (UP) PRESENT R/O WARD NO. 1
                                 PANNA HOUSE NAGAR TEHSIL NOUGAON
                                 DISTRICT CHHATARPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           2.    SMT. KAMLESH SINGH RAJPUT W/O SHRI
                                 BRIJENDRA SINGH RAJPUT, AGED ABOUT 42
                                 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE UMARIYA TEHSIL SARILA
                                 DISTRICT HARPALPUR (U.P.) PRESENT R/O WARD
                                 NO. 1 PANNA HOUSE NAGAR TEHSIL NOUGAON
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ASHISH KUMAR
LILHARE
Signing time: 11-02-2023
13:37:26
                                                        2
                                 DISTRICT CHHATARPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           3.    SMT. NEELAM DWIVEDI W/O SHRI ASHOK
                                 KUMAR DWIVEDI, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/O
                                 DUBIYANA MOHALLA MAHOBA DISTRICT
                                 NAHOBA (U.P.) (UTTAR PRADESH)

                           4.    HARSHAL DWIVEDI S/O SHRI ASHOK KUMAR
                                 DWIVEDI, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/O DUBIYANA
                                 MOHALLA MAHOBA DISTRICT NAHOBA (U.P.)
                                 (UTTAR PRADESH)

                           5.    RAJKUMAR SINGH RAJPUT S/O SHRI BRIJENDRA
                                 SINGH RAJPUT, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/O
                                 VILLAGE UMARIYA TEHSIL SARILA DISTRICT
                                 HAMIRPUR (UTTAR PRADESH)

                           6.    STATE    OF    MADHYA    PRADESH THROUGH
                                 C O L L E C T O R CHHATARPUR     DISTRICT
                                 CHHATARPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                         .....RESPONDENTS


                                 This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
                           following:
                                                                ORDER

This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed against the order dated 07.07.2022 passed by 1st Civil Judge, Senior Division, Naugaon, District Chhatarpur in Civil Suit No. 25-A/2022 by which the application filed by the defendant under Order 7 Rule 11 of C.P.C. has been allowed and petitioners have been directed to pay the ad valorem Court Fees on the valuation of the gift deed i.e. Rs.50,18,587/-.

Challenging the order passed by the Court below it is submitted by the counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have challenged a gift deed on the ground that it was never executed by Ashok Kumar, who is husband of petitioner No. 1 and in fact it was claimed that the said gift deed is a forged document executed by the defendant No. 1. It is submitted that the Division Signature Not Verified Signed by: ASHISH KUMAR LILHARE Signing time: 11-02-2023 13:37:26

Bench of this Court in the case of Manzoor Ahmed Vs. Jaggi Bai and Others, reported in 2009 (4) MPHT 347 has held that for ascertaining the question of Court Fee only the plaint averments are to be seen. It is further submitted that when a document is a void and the plaintiff is not a party to the sale deed nor he is the representatives in interest of the person bound by the sale deed, then the Section 7(iv)(c) of the Court Fees Act will not be attracted. In the present case, the petitioners are not the signatory to the gift deed, therefore, they are not required to pay the ad valorem Court Fee and a fixed Court Fee for declaration is sufficient.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. It is the case of the petitioners that the gift deed was not executed by Ashok Kumar, the husband of the plaintiff No. 1 and father of the petitioners No. 1 to 3 (Plaintiff No. 1 has expired during the pendency of the suit). Thus, it is clear that the petitioners are claiming the representative in interest of Ashok Kumar, who is otherwise bound by the gift deed.

Under these circumstances and in light of the judgment passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Vijay Kumar Vs. Vinay Kumar, reported in 2016 (3) MPLJ 499, it is held that the trial Court did not commit any mistake by directing the petitioners to pay the ad valorem Court Fee on the basis of the valuation of property mentioned in the gift deed i.e.

Rs.50,18,587/-.

Consequently, this petition fails and is hereby dismissed.

(G.S. AHLUWALIA) JUDGE ashish Signature Not Verified Signed by: ASHISH KUMAR LILHARE Signing time: 11-02-2023 13:37:26

Signature Not Verified Signed by: ASHISH KUMAR LILHARE Signing time: 11-02-2023 13:37:26