SANGEET LODHA,J. - (1.) This petition is directed against order dated 16.3.17 passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Rajsamand in Civil Suit No. 4/17, whereby an application preferred by the petitioner under Order 7, Rule 11 CPC, stands rejected.
(2.) The respondents filed a suit for cancellation of sale deed and permanent injunction in respect of his share in a coparcenary property. During the pendency of the petition, the petitioner-defendant filed an application under Order 7, Rule 11 CPC on the ground that the suit filed for cancellation of the sale deed of the property has been undervalued by the plaintiff and the court fee paid is deficient. The petitioner also claimed that the suit filed is barred by limitation.
(3.) The application has been rejected by the court below observing that the plaintiff has claimed the relief of cancellation of the sale deed only to the extent of his ? ..? share in the coparcenary property and thus, the valuation made at Rs. 3,12,500/- appears to be in conformity with the provisions of Section 38 of Rajasthan Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act, 1961. Regarding the question of limitation, the court observed that the question raised is mixed question of law and facts in respect whereof an appropriate issue has already been framed, which shall be decided on the basis of the evidence to be led by the parties. Hence, this petition.;