Civil Revision No.1943 of 2008(O&M) [ 1 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ... Civil Revision No.1943 of 2008(O&M) Decided on : September 07, 2009 Sudesh Rani ... Petitioner VERSUS Shri Hans Raj and others ... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: None for the petitioner. Mr.Balkar Singh, Advocate for the respondents. A.N.JINDAL, J.- The Trial Court while examining the question of court fee has not taken into consideration the provisions of Section 7(IV)C and 7(V)B as well as Article 1 of Schedule 1 of the Court Fee Act, 1870, so also the Court Fee (Haryana Amendment) Act No.22 of 1974. The Trial Court has failed to notice that the plaintiff has claimed inheritance of her father and if she succeeds in proving that the Will and the collusive decrees are not valid, then, she certainly, would be entitled to her share in the property and the decrees as well as the sale-deeds would have no effect upon her rights. Since the Trial court has not taken all the legal aspects in view while passing the impugned order, therefore, the revision petition is Civil Revision No.1943 of 2008(O&M) [ 2 ] accepted and a direction is issued to the Trial Court to frame an issue with regard to the court-fee, which shall be decided along with other issues on merits, at the time of trial. However, it is made clear that the instant order as also the impugned order will have no effect on the decision of the matter on merits. September 07, 2009 ( A.N.JINDAL ) `gian' JUDGE