Civil Revision No. 1707 of 2008 -1- **** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 1707 of 2008 Date of decision: 16.03.2009. Mal Singh ...Petiitioner Versus Jagroop Singh and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D.ANAND. Present: Mr. Ramesh Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. Amarjit Markan, Advocate for respondent no.1. Mr. Vijay Kumar Garg, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 4 ***** S.D.ANAND, J. The learned Trial Court, vide impugned order dated 11.2.2008 directed the petitioner-plaintiff to pay ad-valorem court fees on the plaint. The plaintiff-petitioner had executed a sale deed (No. 3214 dated 27.12.2002 in favour of defendant-respondent no.1. Thereafter, the defendant No. 1-respondent executed a sale deed (No. 2904 dated 4.12.2003) in favour of defendants no.2 to 4. The plaintiff-petitioner applied for a declaration about the invalidation of the sale deed dated 27.12.2002. The defendant-respondent no.1 filed a plea under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C. for a direction to the plaintiff-petitioner to pay ad-valorem court fees on the plaint. The plea was resisted by the plaintiff-petitioner on whose Civil Revision No. 1707 of 2008 -2- **** behalf it was argued that ad-valorem court fee was not payable as he was not asking for the possession of the property in suit. It is apparent from the record that the impugned sale deed contained a recital that the possession of the land sold vide it had been delivered to the vendee. The learned counsel for the plaintiff-petitioner is not in a position to aver, as a fact, that the delivery of possession aforementioned does not stand documented in the revenue record. The plea on behalf of the plaintiff-petitionedr that the controversy should be adjudicated upon only upon the basis of averments in the plaint is neither here nor there in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case in which it is apparent from the record that the possession did exchange hands and the plaintiff-petitioner is indeed entitled to obtain the possession of that land as well. He cannot rest content with asking for a mere declaration. The impugned order cannot, thus, be faulted on any valid score. The petition is held to be denuded of merit and is ordered to be dismissed. March 16, 2009 (S.D.Anand) Pka Judge