Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 24]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Rattan Singh Son Of Ramji Lal R/O Village ... vs Sandeep Minor Son Of Subh Ram Through Her ... on 7 August, 2012

Author: K. Kannan

Bench: K. Kannan

C.R. No.4194 of 2012                                 -1-

     IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                            CHANDIGARH
                                C.R. No.4194 of 2012
                                Date of Decision.07.08.2012

Rattan Singh son of Ramji Lal r/o Village Bargaon, Tehsil Narnaul,
District Mahendargarh, Haryana
                                                 .....Petitioner
                             Versus

Sandeep minor son of Subh Ram through her mother and natural
guardian Smt. Basanti Devi wife of Subh Ram and others
                                                    .....Respondents

Present:      Mr. Tajender K. Joshi, Advocate
              for the appellant.

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN
1.     Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the
       judgment ? No
2.     To be referred to the Reporters or not ? No
3.     Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? No
                                       -.-
K. KANNAN J.(ORAL)

1. The defendant, who objected to the adequacy of Court fee paid on plaint is in revision before this Court. The matter had gone to the trial Court after a disposal in civil revision from the High Court. Unless an objection relating to Court fee has immediate bearing on the jurisdiction of the particular Court to try the case, the matter regarding adequacy or otherwise of the Court fee is invariably a matter between the Court and the party, who seeks for relief in Court. The objection regarding the adequacy of Court fee itself, if it has been dealt with by the trial Court now, it will not be subject of revision at this stage so long as there is no jurisdictional issue. However, the petitioner is at liberty to urge for a contention at the time of argument that Court fee was not properly collected and the Court will decide that if there is any C.R. No.4194 of 2012 -2- insufficient Court fee, it will secure to collect such Court fee before the decree is drafted. There is no interference called for at this stage.

2. The revision petition is dismissed.

(K. KANNAN) JUDGE August 07, 2012 Pankaj*