RAJ PAL SHARMA vs PRITAM DEVI (DECEASED) & ORS

Judgment text excerpt

$~77 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 31st July, 2025 + CM(M) 686/2019 & CM APPL. 31170/2025 RAJ PAL SHARMA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajeshwar Kr. Gupta with Ms. Chauhan, Advocates. versus PRITAM DEVI (DECEASED) & ORS .....Respondent Through: Mr. Avinash Lakhanpal, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. The matter has a chequered history. 2. A suit was filed by the petitioner herein way back in the year 2011 seeking Declaration, Cancellation of Gift Deed and for Injunction. 3. During the pendency of the abovesaid suit, an application was moved by defendant No. 5 under Order VII Rule 11 CPC whereby he contended that the suit had not been properly valued for the purposes of Court Fee and that the plaintiff should have valued his suit at Rs, 1,00,00,000/- and should have also paid ad valorem Court Fee on the said amount. 4. After hearing both the sides, learned Trial Court allowed such application of the defendant No.5 vide order dated 01.07.2017 and while observing that the suit had not been properly valued and the requisite court fee had not been paid, simultaneously, granted time of 12 days to the plaintiff to properly value the suit and to make up the deficient Court Fee. 5. It seems that after disposal of the abovesaid application, the plaintiff filed four applications seeking amendment in the plaint. Two such Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 686/2019 1 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:02.08.2025 12:54:37 applications were withdrawn whereas the other two were dismissed by the learned Trial Court. Since the deficiency had not been made up in terms of order dated 01.07.2017, the suit was also rejected. 6. The present petition has been filed by the plaintiff challenging all such orders. 7. Wh