IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : 14.09.2010 C.R.No.5906 of 2010 (O&M) Jit Singh @ Ajit Singh ...Petitioner Versus Joginder Kaur and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA Present : Mr. Vineet Chaudhary, Advocate, for the petitioner. HEMANT GUPTA, J. (Oral) Challenge in the present petition is to an order passed by the learned trial Court on 11.08.2010, whereby the plaintiff was called upon to affix ad valorem Court fee. The petitioner has filed a suit for declaration challenging sale deed dated 30.05.2008. It is the case of the petitioner that the sale consideration of Rs.34,94,000/- was received by him including the amount received at the time of execution of the agreement, but the balance amount of Rs.65,30,000/- remains unpaid. The plaintiff raised objections before the Sub Registrar, but the sale deed was registered. It is on the said basis, the plaintiff claims that the sale deed is null and void. A reading of the plaint shows that the plaintiff is challenging the sale deed to be null and void only for the reason that the balance amount of sale consideration i.e. Rs.65,30,000/- has not been paid. In view of the said fact and the fact that the plaintiff is party to the sale deed, therefore, in terms of the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Suhrid Singh C.R.No.5906 of 2010 (O&M) @ Sardool Singh Vs. Randhir Singh and others 2010 (2) RCR (Civil) 564 (C.A.NO. 2811-13 of 2010 decided on 29.3.2010), the plaintiff is liable to pay ad valorem Court fee. Consequently, I do not find any merit in the present revision petition. The same is accordingly dismissed. 14.09.2010 (HEMANT GUPTA) Vimal JUDGE 2