Interim Order 13

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: CS SCJ45/23
AMARNATH Vs. SUNDRAM
ORDER
06.08.2024
1. Vide this order, I will decide application under Order VII Rule 10
CPC filed on behalf of the Defendant
2. At the outset, it is pertinent to mention that an application under
Order VII Rule 10 CPC filed by the Defendant is not
maintainable. Reliance in this regard is placed on decision of
Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in WP no. 100173/24, DOD
22.01.2024 titled Acharya Pathshala Educational Trust.
3. However, it is also settled law that an application should not be
dismissed merely because a wrong provision of law has been
mentioned. Perusal of the contents of the application makes it
apparently clear that it is esstentially an application under Order
VII Rule 11 CPC filed on the ground that the suit property has not
been properly valued. It is settled law that while dealing with
application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, it only the contents of
the plaint which has to be referred to and not the defence of the
Defendant.
4. In the present case, Plaintiff has claimed that he was a tenant of
shop no. 20, khasra no. 30/1, gali no. 6, Master mohalla, Libaspur,
Delhi and that he was illegally dispossesed from the same on
29.09.2022 leading to the present suit of possession and
injunction.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
CS SCJ45/23
AMARNATH Vs. SUNDRAM
5. S. 7 (xi) (e) Court Fees Act, 1870 lays down that suits to recover
occupancy of immovable property from which tenant has been
illegally ejected by the landlord ought to be valued at the amount
of rent of immovable property to which the suit refers payable for
the previous year with court fees to be paid at such valuation. The
Plaintiff has claimed that the yearly rent was Rs. 1,92,000/ upon
which, the proper court fees has been paid. There is no informity
in the valuation of the Plaintiff. As regards non impleadment of
necessary party, it is settled law that a plaint cannot be rejected on
such a ground (Silvermaple Healthcare Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dr.
Tajinder Bhatti 2022/DHC/004573).
6. In light of the aforesaid observations, the application stands
dismissed and stands disposed off accordingly.
(PRITU RAJ)
CIVIL JUDGE (NORTH)
ROHINI/DELHI/06.08.2024
-- 2 of 2 --