C.R. No.2889 of 2007 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No.2889 of 2007 Date of Decision: 06.10.2009 Kanta Devi .....Petitioner Versus Ramesh Singh and others ...Respondents Present: None for the parties. 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. There is no representation on either side. This is a case indentified as fit for immediate disposal under Samadhan 2009. I, therefore, proceed to pass an order on the basis of records available before me. 2. The issue of appropriate court fee has been raised in an application under Order 7 Rule 11 at the instance of the defendant. The suit has been filed for declaration that a decree in Civil Suit No.174 of 1995 dated 05.05.1995 and the consequent mutation and the sale deed were declared as null and void. While considering the objection raised by the defendant, the court below has considered the fact that the primary relief was validity of the Civil Court decree dated 05.05.1995 and the mutation and the sale C.R. No.2889 of 2007 -2- deed are subsequent events which would either be seen as valid or invalid on the principal relief relating to the validity and binding nature of the decree dated 05.05.1995. On such a line of reasoning, the Court below has observed that only no court fee on notional valuation was required to be paid and that was complied with by the plaintiff. There is no error in the order passed by the Court below and it does not required to be modified in any way. However, in view of the fact that there was no representation before me, the Court can re-examine the issue of frame of the suit and its valuation along with other reliefs in a full fldeged trial on all issues. 3. Reserving this liberty, the civil revision petition is dismissed. No costs. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE October 06, 2009 Pankaj*