SANGEETA CHANDRA, J. - (1.)Heard Sri B. K. Saxena, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri Ratnesh Chandra, learned counsel for the opposite party no.1.
(2.)This Revision has been filed challenging the order dtd. 4/4/2022 passed in Original Suit No. 256 of 2007, 'Vijay Dembla vs. Sanjay Dembla and Others by the Court of Civil Judge(Senior Division), Lucknow where the learned Trial Court has decided the issue of Valuation of the Suit i.e. Issue no. 3 and also Issue no.4 relating to payment of enhanced court fee thereon.
(3.)It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the revisionist that the plaintiff i.e. the petitioner filed a Suit for Declaration of Will executed by his mother and also the mother of the opposite party no.1 and 2, Late Rekha Devi Dembla as void and for the Permanent Injunction injuncting the defendant from interfering in the property in dispute. According to the Plaint, a copy of which has been filed as annexure-02 of the application for interim relief, paragraph 14 mentions the contents of the Will and states such contents as factually incorrect, and paragraph 53 mentions, the valuation for the purpose of pecuniary jurisdiction of court fee. As the relief sought was for Declaration in respect of the Will valuation of which was not possible it was notionally fixed at Rs.35,000.00 upon which maximum court fee Rs.200.00 was paid and for further relief of permanent injunction regarding property in dispute Rs.35,00,000.00 was fixed as market value and a maximum court fee of Rs.500.00 was paid. The total valuation of the Suit as per the plaint was Rs.35,35,000.00 on which Court Fee of Rs.700.00 was paid. Against such a statement being made in the plaint the respondent no.1 filed a Written Statement. While replying to the contents of paragraph 53 of the plaint in paragraph 45 of the Written Statement, it was stated that they were misconceived and wrong and that the Suit filed by the plaintiff for Declaration and Permanent Injunction was not maintainable, and also that the Court Fee had not been properly paid by the plaintiff, and therefore, the Suit was liable to be dismissed.