HI<aieQURTOy<2iIHAT'nSG«RHATBILASi»(?R -WLP. ^SmilO. 6864/2010 PBTITXOWBEM Respondent No. 1 & 2 RBSPOKDBWT8 1. 2. VBRSOS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. SIu'imatl Gita Devi, W/o Setiam DewaiqEan, aged about 38 years, R/o Saktl, Waxd No. 13, Tahsffl Sakti, DistrictJaajagir-eiimapa, (C.G.)- Setlam Dewaagaa, S/o Nafhiuaia Dewangau, afsed. aoibut 43 years, R/o S^ti, Waid No. 13, 'faiMfl SAti, DistrictJanja®r-CSampa.(G.O.). Ziiaftermn Dcwangan, S/o Nathiuam Dewaiigan., aged about 56 yesus, R/o Sal^ Ward No; 13, T^tea Sa]^ DistrictJait^BT-Chaaqia, (C-G^. PaacharEaa EtewaagsEm, ^o Na uiaau DewmigaB, R/o Safcti, Wanl No. 13, Talisffl Spfcri, nisfrift.Iamjngirflianipa (C.G.y- ^iauiEtilfa. Slinmatt KachaEa Bal»D/o Naltuusia Dcwaa^ia, W/o Aaiartd DeWian^Ba, Aged abowt 33 'yeass.'Rf'o viBage Bh&ii, Taihsil JEU^agir, EHstrict JmaE®B'-Ctlfiimpa,|^C.G.). aitanatt M^^atja Bai^ D/o NaflMBcaia Dewaagaa,^QRiai;jmi^I5e^ Agad: bout 49 yeaxs, R/o mllagc Itera, Tahsfl. NairageBh, E)istriet Jaa^u- caiaa®a,(C.G.). SIicimajti. RFem Bai, D/o N<(tIisuH'aa Dewm^an, W/o Tikatam. 'DewaagMa, Agedaft)pat463®ars,R/o^^^Atii,Waid nb. 10, Aldiacabliata Sahti,' T'ahsffl Saktt, District jMijagu" -dastaspSt. (P.G.). State of CUhattfagaxti, <it^^ CoBectar Jaaj^iT-CIwcBipa, (C.Gh). wiaTjemiTioM uHi%RARTica^5Kw/aa7«w^^T^ ^filPaBi^^',^^;^'::,:•::¥:.. " ::'/ 1':: ',,-:.",:''':: >: 1 ( dU6«^Me»to'.TJPAtiaarma,J4 F'r^ent:- Ms. Renu I&chi^ Ad'»oc»te^^te 1 Mr. Soarald^ShaEm&,Adsocate&>r<te;i^^ Mr.VmodKiiftiarTelEam,R.I«.^thfiSt^/re^ Nbrie IbTtherespCTida^Ne, ato5. ^ ( •^0»UL.:'CIE(Maf1 - • ; ,: • . ',:,(PaMW^Wfi'lli^O?y2<Ill). .:: i, BytiuspctitipnuDderArt^ 226^^7 off^Co^^ bflwe chaUeBgBd tlie legaltty anjd.^R^me^ of'fliepfdCTidated. 15^9/2010 passed by C^ Jud^ Gtoss ^.Satett (C.G.) m cwilSuItNa. 58-A/09 wbiMeby! ••^.s^ifc^ ^^•\^<i - l%aB»i'3^" ^f Coiut bdtow bas deeidcd thc pretemuiaxy issue Nos. 6 & 7 positive wluch aic as foBows:- (6)- qqi qi<?l'Ilul gre 'qR cpr ^^(T 'jpilltfr'l cR "qi'sitlc*)' 3RI ^V 'Vlf 11 (7)- qqr w? ^t ^RRT el'siilEltf'K 4 ^r f^ir "'FSIT ti 2, As per copy of fhc plaint plaintiffa who were not party to titte aaSc deed cxceuted by their fafticr ffled civil sult for declaaation, pennanent injitnction, declaratton of sale decd executed by ttteir father as nuffl and void and confirxnation of possession 6r in altemate reMef ia case fhey wifl aot found in isession fhen also sult for possessian ia wluch they have vahicd elaim of Rs. ^OO/-, 300/-, 300/- and Rs. 100/- twcnly timesof laad rev ue i.e. Rs. 5/- aad paid fKed 0>urt fees ofRs. 100/- lOO/-, 100/- & Rs. Wf-totat Rs. 350/-. Suit was fited befbre fhe Ovil Judge Ctess -II, Sdrtii(C.G.) vide mAer mipi^ned Coiu-t betow has arri»ed at a feidiag tbat Court bdow is haviag pecuniaiy and temtorial junsdictioa to tiy fhc siaat bf aforcsald valuatioii and plamtiffs Imve cbrrecttyvalued tUe sidt, Courtbelow has deiced &e afin^ pTelmunaiy issue afiBnaatwe. Leamed cbunsel for the petitioners vcheaiently argucd that plalnti'ffe WCTB uader obl^attoa fo value the suit property <w]f the baste of mariket vsdue and luram Court fees was reqiured to pay but nistesd of paying such Court f^ for possession of fhe suit property fhey have vatued fhc sait on the basis < of las^ Teveaue payabte to fhe estate wluch is conteary to the pcovisioias of Section 7(iv) (a)of1±teCourtFeesAct, l870(m sbortthe Acf). 4. Lcamed cchaisel for fhc petitionqra placed BeUance in ttie matter of Sulirid Slnrii (®Sardool SIn^di v. Raadh^ 8*n|^> & t^'a- leportcd M* AIRSK>tO 8C 2807 in which Supromc Court h^ hcM that siut for declaratioa Ihat sale deed has been cxecuted by plaintiff's feffaer aasc nuU aad void and for Joiat possession is not a suit for caucellation of sale deed Ctourt fee need apt be paid on sate consideration laentloned ia sale dceds Court fec payablc is coinputable undcr Sectioa 7[v>) (c) offhe Act. .;'- J- 5. 6. 7. Oa the other hand.learaed counscl for the respoadents No. 1 & 2 and lcamed counselforthc State/respoudeutNo. 6 opposed the petition. Leamed couasel for fhc respoadents No. 1 & 2 subaaits lliat Coort below has ri^h.tfy decided preluninary Issucs ia ita n®htpcrspective. Lcarued cpunsel for the respoadents No. 1 & 2 placcd retiance ia the srfoiesald case as telied by leamed counsel for fhe peti.ti.oners. As per plaiataHegation plainttffs aie not party to ssde deed cven tecy are not reqiured to pray f&r dcdaiation of such sale cteed nuU and void, reUef to fhis fact tfaatsale deed is notbindiBg is sufficient for fhem. la case ofdeclaratma and mjunctton not con.sequential in nature, plmTitiffis at ffieaty to value tiie itf- ~ ' • : claini as pcr valiiatton xaade by plaintiffs. In fbe preseat case aforesaad wlief are not conscquential to each ofhcr oaaly fhe rdfef of posscssloa is consequential forwhich ptaiatiffs bave valucd tte olaim. As per Scction 7 (S)(b) of &C Act, siut^was wtthiu tMiifonal^cuatety JunscUction offhc cavil Judgp C^s^,Sakti(G;G^.Goase<^a^,s'irtMle<^ positiwe/afiGnnati^ Court betow li^^^^t^ acy intei-feTcnce in exerctscpfsupervisoryjurisd*crtfon.C(^sequeaitty,pct^^ js liabteto be dBnaiased and is herebydisausscd. Noorclerastocosts. i Sd/- T. P. Sharma Judge