Civil Revision No.4302 of 2007(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.4302 of 2007(O&M) Date of Decision 27.04.2009 Suraj Bhan ......Petitioner VERSUS The Shahabad Coop. Sugar Mills Ltd. and others ......Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG Present: Mr.R.C.Chaudhary, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.S.C.Sibal, Senior Advocate with Mr.V.S.Rana, Advocate, for respondent No.1. ***** RAKESH KUMAR GARG, J(ORAL): This revision petition has been filed by defendant, challenging the impugned order dated 06.08.2007, passed by District Judge, Kurukshetra, whereby he has been directed to pay the ad-valorem Court fee on his memorandum of appeal, challenging the judgment and decree of trial Court dated 11.06.2007 whereby the suit for recovery of Rs.13,39,100/- alongwith interest @ 12% per annum has been decreed against the defendants (including the appellant) jointly and severally. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that he is not liable to pay Court fee ad-valorem on the memorandum of appeal filed by him before the Lower Appellate Court which is only against unnecessary findings of collusion of petitioner with respondents No.2 to 4 and he wants deletion of the words jointly and severally in the impugned judgment and Civil Revision No.4302 of 2007(O&M) 2 decree. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. I find no merit in this revision. The operative part of the Trial Court judgment is as under:- “In view of the findings given on the aforesaid issues, the suit of the plaintiff succeeds and the same is hereby decreed with costs to the effect that the plaintiff is entitled to recover the amount of Rs.13,39,100/- from the defendants with pendente lite and future interest @ 12% per annum. Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the decretal amount. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly and file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.” The ultimate prayer of the petitioner in the appeal is that he is not liable to pay the amount as per the findings of the Trial Court as the findings of the Trial Court with regard to his collusion with respondents No.2 to 4 are unnecessary. The effect of the prayer of the petitioner is that the appeal filed by the appellant is to be accepted and he is to be held not liable for payment of the amount as per the impugned judgment and decree. Thus, appellant is challenging his liability to pay, may be on any ground, therefore, he is liable to pay ad-valorem Court fee. However, this will not preclude him from moving any other appropriate application before the Lower Appellate Court, in accordance with law. The revision petition is dismissed. April 27, 2009 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) mamta-II JUDGE Civil Revision No.4302 of 2007(O&M) 3