C.R.No.691 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH. C.R.No.691 of 2010 Date of decision: 29.4.2010 Sube Singh .....Petitioner vs. M/S Triveni Infrastructure Development Co.Ltd and another ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG. --- Present: Mr.P.R.Yadav, Advocate, for the petitioner. -- Rakesh Kumar Garg,J.(Oral) This is plaintiff's revision petition challenging the order dated 13.3.2008 whereby the petitioner was directed to affix ad valorem court fee on Rs.56,52,500/- being the sale consideration of the impugned sale deed. At the preliminary hearing learned counsel for the petitioner stated that in view of the amendment made by the Haryana Act No.22 of 1974 with effect from 31.1.1974 in the Court Fee Act, 1870, the petitioner could have been asked to affix the court fee on the subject matter, which is agricultural land, at the rate of Rs.50/- per acre as ad valorem court fee and, therefore, the impugned order is erroneous and is liable to be set aside. The order dated 2.2.2010 passed by this Court reads as follows:- “ Learned counsel for thepetitioner states that in view of the amendment made by the Haryana Act No.22 of 1974 with effect from 31.1.1974 in the Court Fee Act, 1870, the petitioner could be asked to affix the court fee on the subject matter, which is agricultural land, @ Rs.50/- per acre and, therefore, the impugned order is erroneous whereby he has been asked to C.R.No.691 of 2010 2 affix the court fee as per the value in the sale deed, which is sought to be ignored. Notice of motion for 19.2.2010. Dasti only. In the meantime, the trial Court may adjourn the case beyond the date fixed before this Court”. The case came up for hearing on 10.3.2010 and after noticing that Dasti service upon the respondents was not effected, the petition was dismissed in default, as no one had appeared on behalf of the petitioner C.M.No.7216-C of 2010 was filed by the petitioner for recalling the aforesaid order. Notice of this application was given and the respondents were ordered to be served by way of Dasti process. As per office report service is complete, however, no one is present. The respondents are, therefore, ordered to be proceeded against ex-parte. For the reasons recorded in C.M.No.7216-C of 2010, order dated 10.3.2010 is recalled and the revision petition is restored to its original number. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted before this Court that in compliance of the order dated 2.2.2010 passed by this Court, the petitioner will affix the court fee at the rate of Rs.50/- per acre, being the ad valorem court fee, on the subject matter within two weeks from today. He has further argued that the matter of payment of court fee is between the petitioner and the Court and in any case if at the time of final decision of the case the Court comes to a conclusion that more court fee was payable by the petitioner, a direction can be issued to make up the deficiency in Court fee. C.R.No.691 of 2010 3 In view of the above, this petition is disposed of with the direction that the petitioner shall affix the court fee at the rate of Rs.50/- per acre on the subject matter of the suit, which is stated to be agricultural land. On his doing so, the trial Court shall proceed further with the case without insisting for affixation of court fee as per the impugned order. However, the trial Court is at liberty to frame issue with regard to the proper payment of court fee and decide the same at an appropriate time in accordance with law. Disposed of. ( Rakesh Kumar Garg) Judge April 29, 2010 rk