IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.R. No. 4475 of 2011 Date of decision: 26.7.2011 Rishi Raj … Petitioner versus Smt. Rajwati … Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR Present: Mr. Satish Chaudhary, Advocate, for the petitioner ... ARVIND KUMAR, J: The present petitioner is the plaintiff in the suit for declaration with consequential relief of permanent injunction, titled Rishi Raj v. Smt. Rajwati. The Court while deciding the application filed by the defendant under Order 7 rule 11, Code of Civil Procedure, vide order dated 4.12.2010 directed the plaintiff to affix ad-valorem court-fee on the sale consideration of the documents under challenge on or before 12.2.2011. Plaintiff did not comply with the said order; however, vide order dated 5.5.2011 on the request of counsel for the plaintiff, he was granted time to affix court-fee upto 6.6.2011 failing which the plaint was deemed to have been rejected. Again, there has been non-compliance. Hence, this revision. Heard. Counsel for the petitioner-plaintiff does not press order dated 4.12.2010 but only prays that further one month's time be given to the plaintiff for deposit of the court-fee. Plaintiff may suffer an irreparable loss if interference in the impugned order is not made. Accordingly, the present revision is allowed, impugned order is set aside and one month's time is granted to the plaintiff-petitioner to deposit the court-fee. July 26, 2011 ( ARVIND KUMAR ) JS JUDGE