Interim Order 8

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: 18 CS 254/24
Shilpi Jain Vs. Rajni Sharma
DLET010026272024
10.09.2026
Pr. Sh. Ankur Gupta, Ld. Counsel for plaintiff.
Sh. Sachin Sangwan, Ld. Counsel for the defendant.
An application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC is pending
adjudication. Perusal of record reveals that the plaintiff has valued the
suit for the purpose of jurisdiction at Rs.5,50,000/ and thereafter has
again valued the suit for the relief of declaration at Rs.200/ and for
the relief of permanent injunction at Rs.130/.
Section 8 of the Suit Valuation Act provides that the valuation
for the purpose of jurisdiction and for computation of court fees shall
be same. In the instant case, the plaintiff has given different valuations
for the purposes of jurisdiction and court fees. Once the suit has been
valued at Rs.5,50,000/ for the purposes of jurisdiction, thereafter, it is
valued at Rs.200/ and Rs.130/ for payment of court fees of Rs.20/ &
Rs.13/ respectively. The same is not in consonance with the
provisions of Section 8 of the Suit Valuation Act. Plaintiff shall make
necessary changes in the valuation clause of the plaint by filing
appropriate application with advance copy to opposite side.
By way of instant suit, the relief of declaration and permanent
injunction has been sought with respect to a shop. Prima facie, it
appears to be a commercial dispute, in case the suit is valued at
Rs.5,50,000/. Plaintiff shall also render clarification in this regard.
Renotify the matter for arguments on the aforesaid aspect on
27.10.2026 at 12:00 Noon.
(SHUCHI LALER)
District Judge02 (East),
Karkardooma Courts/10.09.2026
-- 1 of 1 --