CR No.6129/2011(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.6129/2011(O&M) Date of decision: 04.10.2011. Ratni Devi and others ....................Petitioners v. Kaushalya @ Kaushal and others .....................Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Jaswant Singh Present: Mr.Nonish Kumar,Advocate for the petitioners. Jaswant Singh.J.(Oral) Defendants, who are the widow and sons of late Karta Ram have filed the present revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution assailing the order dated 12.8.2011 (P2) whereby their application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC for rejection of the plaint in the suit filed by two daughters of Karta Ram for non-affixation of ad valorem court fee, has been dismissed. Learned counsel for the petitioners-defendants has argued that the plaintiffs/respondents are claiming their share in the compensation determined by the Land Acquisition Collector qua their purported share in the land left behind by Karta Ram and the claim is definite and measurable and as such they are liable to affix ad valorem court fee. CR No.6129/2011(O&M) 2 After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners, this Court is not persuaded to agree with the plea raised on behalf of the defendants/petitioners. It is apparent from the pleadings that the two daughters had filed a suit for declaration to the extent of their share in the joint property with joint possession alongwith rendition of accounts and for recovery of compensation collected by the defendants on account of subsequent acquisition of the land by the State authorities. It is evident that the primary relief claimed is that of declaration and the rest is a consequence of the same. I am further in agreement with the reasoning adopted by the learned trial court in paras 7 and 8 of the impugned order dated 12.8.2011. In view of the above,finding no merit in this revision petition the same is hereby dismissed. 04.10.2011 (Jaswant Singh) joshi Judge