GURDAS SINGH vs GURSEHAJ SINGH

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CR-3842-2026 Date of decision: 07.05.2026 Gurdas Singh . . . . Petitioner Vs. Gursehaj Singh . . . . Respondent **** CORAM: HON’BLE MR JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA **** Present: - Mr.P.K.S. Phoolka, Advocate, for the petitioner. **** DEEPAK GUPTA, J. The present revision petition has been directed against the order dated 03.02.2026 (Annexure P-1) passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bathinda, whereby the application filed by the defendant- petitioner under Order VII Rule 11 CPC seeking rejection of the plaint on the ground of deficient court fee was dismissed and the defendant was granted one final opportunity to file written statement. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the plaint itself discloses that the respondent-plaintiff has claimed damages to the extent of ₹5,00,000/- and, therefore, ad valorem court fee was mandatorily payable at the time of institution of the suit. It is argued that mere use of the expression that damages are “to be assessed by the Court” would not absolve the plaintiff from payment of proper court fee. According to counsel, the plaint being insufficiently stamp