RESPONDENTS DEFENDANTS S. B. HON’BLE SHRI DHIRENDRA MISIRA, J Writ Petition (227} Na.1824/2008 PETITIONER PEAINTIFF Anil Knmar Dubey, S/o. Shri Girija Prasad Dubey, Aged about 33 years, R/o Old Bus Starld, Ambikapur, District Surguja(Chhattisgarh) v VER$US Smt. Shanti Tripathi, W/o Rajaram ’I‘Iipathi, Aged about 65 years, R/o Shivrajpur, Post Shivrajpur, Tahsil Billore, District Kanpur (UP) Sardar Resham Singh S/o Late Shri Sardar Bhagat Singh, Aged about ‘48 years, R/o Old Bus Stand, Ambikapur, District Surguja (CG) By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has mpugned the order dated 8. 1.20033, , 27.3.2008 Shri Manoj Paranjpe, counsel for the petitioner. w t L ‘-, C-22 (Annexum P/4) where y the learned District Judga, Ambikapur has paxtly allowed the objection of, the respondents/defendants er Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of: Civil Procedure with r spect to valuation of the suit and payment of Court fees directed the petitioner/plaintih' to pay the ad valorem Court ee. Learned counsel f0 the petitioner fairly submits that the petitioner/ plaintiff ha tiled the above suit for cancellation of the sale deed and pos ession of the suit property. as he is out of possession and refore, ad valorem Court fee was payable by the petition r/plaintiji‘. The only submission advanced by learned c el for the petitioner is that from perusal of . the lication preferred by the respondents/defendants efore the Court below it would be evident that the petition r/plaintiff had taken an objection that since the plaintih'h s prayed for declaration of the sale deed as void and ineh‘e ve, therefore, he oughtViwg/to have paid ad voleram Court fe as per Section 7(iv)(a) of the Court Fees Act. Since the peti o'ner/plaintjif is not a party to the sale deed en‘ected by the respondent No. 1, therefore, he was not requiredito pay ad V leram Court fee on the basis of the consideration mentioned the sale deed. d e o s p Having heard learned perused the impugned orde is no illegality or infirmity o the-trial Court, which calls of the Constitution of India Accordingly, the petition being erves to be dismissed at the ; hereby dismissed. devoid of substance des admission stage itself and i: In View of above, 1.! relief and I.A.No.2, applic disposed of. counsel for the petitioner,‘ having ’ Ir, this Court is satisfied that there l r jurisdictional error committed by for interference under Article 227 i.No.1, application for aid-interim ation for urgent hearing, stand l ‘ Sd/- i Dhirendra Mishra - Judge [WinW