IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.1728 of 2010(O&M) Date of decision: 15.3.2010 Raj Kumar Singh and ors. ......Petitioner(s) Versus Amar Singh & ors. ......Respondent(s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG * * * Present: Mr. Jayender S. Chandail, Advocate for the petitioners. Rakesh Kumar Garg, J.(Oral) This is defendants' revision petition challenging the impugned order whereby application moved by them seeking dismissal of the suit for deficiency in court fee was rejected. As per the averments, the plaintiff-respondent No.1 filed a suit for declaration to the effect that he was entitled to inherit the entire suit property in accordance with the Rule of Succession prevailing in the family i.e. Rule of Primogeniture and the division/alienation etc. of the estate was ineffective and inoperative qua his rights, with consequential relief of injunction. Undisputed the aforesaid suit was filed in the year 1999. Admittedly, the petitioners in their written statement raised an objection of payment of proper court fees by the plaintiff-respondent No.1. The issues were also framed in the suit in the year 1999 itself. Admittedly, the petitioners did not claim any issue with regard to proper payment of court fees nor any such application was filed thereafter. The present application under Order 7 Rule 11(b) CPC has been filed after more than 10 years of framing of issues. Admittedly, the petitioners have taken the objection of Court fees in their written statement, Despite the fact that an objection was taken in the written statement, no CR No.1728 of 2010(O&M) -2- issue was claimed on the question of court fee. Neither any application was filed by them in these 10 years for framing of any additional issue which could have been done. In these circumstances, I find no merit in this petition which has been filed at a belated stage. Dismissed. March 15, 2010 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) ps JUDGE