Civil Revision No.6587 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.6587 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 13.12.2010 Ashok Kumar ....Petitioner Versus Luxmi and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present: - Mr. G.C. Shahpuri, Advocate, for Mr. Ranjit Saini, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Sanjay S. Chauhan, Advocate, for respondent No.6. 1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? ***** ALOK SINGH, J (ORAL) None for respondents No.1 to 5 although served through the counsel appearing before the trial Court. The only question involved in the present petition is, as to whether plaintiff is supposed to pay the ad valorem court fee on the market value or the sale consideration of the property sold even if plaintiff is not the executant of the sale deed. Question stands replied by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Suhrid Singh @ Sardool Singh Vs. Randhir Singh and others, 2010(2) RCR (Civil) 564 In view of the dictum of the Hon'ble Apex Court, plaintiff is not supposed to pay the ad valorem court fee on the relief of declaration Civil Revision No.6587 of 2010 (O&M) -2- seeking transaction null and void if plaintiff is not the executant of the sale deed. Consequently, petition is allowed. Impugned order is set aside. (Alok Singh) Judge December 13, 2010 R.S.