Rampati W/O Jagdish Narayan vs Pappu Lal Saini S/O Nathu Lal
2022 Latest Caselaw 3601 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

              S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 6/2022

Rampati W/o Jagdish Narayan
                                                                  ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
Pappu Lal Saini S/o Nathu Lal
                                                                ----Respondent

With

S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 7/2022

Rampati W/o Jagdish Narayan ,

----Petitioner Versus Manish Saini S/o Pappu Lal,

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashok Kumar Pareek For Respondent(s) :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL

Order

07/05/2022 Petitioner-plaintiff has filed a civil suit for declaration of the

registered sale deed as null and void and a consequential relief of

possession has also been prayed for.

The trial court in the impugned order observed that the

valuation of the present suit for declaration and a consequential

possession should be made at least according to the market value

as mentioned in the sale deed itself. Whereas, the plaintiff has

made valuation of the present suit, determining the market value

of the land in question under Section 7(2) of the Rajasthan Court

Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961, i.e. 25 times of the land

revenue lagaan of the last settlement.

(2 of 2) [CR-6/2022]

Thus, the question arises as to whether in the present civil

suit, the market value of the subject land should be determined 25

times of the land revenue lagaan of last settlement or as per the

market value mentioned in the document in question of registered

sale deed?

Learned counsel for petitioner has placed reliance on the

judgment of coordinate bench of Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur

Bench passed in case of Kiran Devi (Smt.) & Anr. Vs. Shri

Nirmal Joshi & Ors. [2012(2) RLW 1235 (Raj.)]

Since, the issue involved with regard to determination of

market value and payment of court fees thereon, this Court deems

it just and proper that the State of Rajasthan is necessary and

appropriate party to be heard on this issue. Hence, petitioner is

directed to implead the State of Rajasthan as party to the present

revision petitions for the purpose of determination of the aforesaid

issue.

The copy of the revision petitions be served in the Office of

Advocate General with the present order.

Let the name of Mr. M.S. Singhvi, Advocate General be

shown in the cause list as counsel for respondent-State.

List these revision petitions on 06.07.2022.

In the meanwhile, the trial court shall not reject the plaint on

the ground of non-payment of deficit court fees in pursuance to

the impugned orders dated 22.03.2021.

(SUDESH BANSAL),J

SACHIN/17-18

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)