C.R.No.5688 of 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R.No.5688 of 2009. Decided on: November 25, 2009. Shisha Singh .. Petitioner VERSUS Smt.Raj Kaur and others .. Respondents * * * CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.S.BEDI 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. Whether to be referred to the Reporter? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? * * * PRESENT Mr.Vikram Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) Vide impugned order dated 05.09.2009, the application filed by the defendants-respondents under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, seeking a direction to the plaintiff-petitioner for affixing ad valorem Court fee on the amount of sale consideration of impugned sale deed dated 21.09.2006, has been allowed and the plaintiff has been directed to submit the ad valorem Court fee with the plaint by assessing the same on the amount of sale considerationi of . . . 1 C.R.No.5688 of 2009 Rs.31,46,000/-. Counsel for the petitioner submits that as the sale deed challenged is regarding agricultural land which is the subject matter of land revenue, the ad valorem Court fee payable would be not on the value of the property but on the value which is 10 times the land revenue in terms of Section 7 (IV) © as quantified under Section 7(V) of the Court Fees Act. Reliance has also been placed on amendment made by State of Haryana vide Act No.22 of 1974. After hearing the counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that the trial Court is required to reconsider the matter in context to the amendment made by the State of Haryana Vide Act No.22 of 1974, and redetermine the amount of Court fee. The ratio of the Ruling Smt.Beena and others Vs. Rajinder Kumar and others, 2006 (2) R.C.R., (Civil), 449, is required to be taken into consideration. The matter is referred back to the trial Court. The trial Court is required to take into consideration, the amendment made by the State of Haryana Vide Act No.22 of 1974 and redetermine the amount of Court fee which is payable in the present case. It will be open to the petitioner to bring to the notice of the Court the said notification. The revision petition is allowed to that extent and order dated 05.09.2009, is hereby set aside with a direction to the trial Court to reconsider the matter of affixation of Court fee in the light of amendment made by the State of Haryana Vide Act No.22 of . . . 2 C.R.No.5688 of 2009 1974. Parties to the suit are directed to appear before the trial Court on the date already fixed or on 19.12.2009, whichever is later. (M.M.S.BEDI) JUDGE November 25, 2009. rka . . . 3