Sayed Khalil Ahmed v. Sh. Jawahar Lal Goyal & Ors.

Delhi High Court · 22 Sep 2014 · 2014:DHC:4876
Valmiki J. Mehta
CM(M) No.342/2011
2014:DHC:4876
civil appeal_dismissed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court upheld the lower court's order allowing conversion of a suit for injunction into a suit for possession, directing payment of court fees as per market value under Section 7(v) of the Court Fees Act, 1870, and permitted amendment of the plaint accordingly.

Full Text
Translation output
CM(M) No.342/2011 HIGH COURT OF DELHI C.M.(M) No.342/2011 & C.M.Nos.6039/2011 (stay), 7559/2011 (u/S 151
CPC)
22th September, 2014 SAYED KHALIL AHMED ......Petitioner
Through: None
VERSUS
SH. JAWAHAR LAL GOYAL & ORS. ...... Respondents
Through: Mr.J.K.Gupta, Advocate for R-1.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA
To be referred to the Reporter or not? VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL)
JUDGMENT

1. This petition impugns the orders of the court below dated 09.2.2011 and 21.2.2011 by which the respondent no.1/plaintiff was allowed to convert the suit for injunction to a suit for possession and ordered filing of appropriate court fees.

2. It is however noted that pursuant to the impugned orders, the respondent no.1/plaintiff has valued the amended suit only at 12 months’ rent instead of court fees on the market value of property in a suit for 2014:DHC:4876 CM(M) No.342/2011 possession which is required as per Section 7(v) of the Court Fees Act, 1870 (in short ‘the Act’).

3. Learned counsel for respondent no.1/plaintiff states that he will pay court fees now on the suit for possession as per Section 7(v) of the Act. Respondent no.1/plaintiff is accordingly also allowed to amend the plaint to include this aspect with respect to claiming possession as per Section 7(v) of the Act and also state paying of the court fees accordingly.

4. The petition is disposed of in terms of the aforesaid observations, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J SEPTEMBER 22, 2014 KA