B.S.VERMA,J. - (1.) BY means of this revision, the revisionists-defendants have assailed the order dated 24-2-1993 passed by the Additional District Judge, Dehradun in Original Suit No. 959 of 1990, Sri Kewal Senon (now deceased) Vs. Rani Sumitra Raje and others on the application moved by the plaintiff-respondent Kewal Senon (paper no. 60-C).
(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts giving rise to the present revision are that initially the plaintiff-respondent Shri Kewal Senon (since deceased) filed a suit for declaration of his title over the property detailed in Schedule 'B' of the plaint and for perpetual injunction against the defendant-revisionists herein from dispossession or interfering in the possession of the plaintiff in respect of the property in question. In reply to the suit, the revisionists-defendants have filed their counter claim and sought relief to declare the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff as illegal, null and void and also for a decree of permanent injunction against the plaintiffs from interfering in the possession of the defendants or from dispossessing them in respect of the property known as part of the Leopard Estate described in relief 'A' of the counter-claim. For cancellation of the sale deed 2 the defendant-revisionists paid court-fee as per provisions of Article 17(iii) of Schedule-II of the Court Fees Act 1870 and for relief 'B', they paid court fee under the provisions of Section 7(iv)(b) of the Court-Fees Act.
(3.) AGAINST the counter-claim preferred by the defendantrevisionists, the plaintiff-respondents filed objection (paper no. 61-C) alleging therein that the court fee paid by the defendants is insufficient.;