Vipan Kumar v. Kalu Ram through His Lrs and Anr.
Case brief
What is this about?
Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh; CR-1615-2025; decided 18.03.2025 by Justice Vikas Bahl (oral judgment); petitioner Vipan Kumar (plaintiff) versus legal heirs of deceased Kalu Ram (defendants); civil revision under Article 227 challenging trial court order of 05.02.2025 disposing of defendant-side application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC for rejection of plaint; suit for possession of shops No.19, 20 at Mandi Guruharsahai with consequential permanent injunction; ad valorem court fee deficiency to be made good by 20.03.2025 else plaint deemed automatically rejected; impugned order upheld as in accordance with law; revision petition dismissed as meritless; keywords: ad valorem court fee, Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, rejection of plaint, court fee deficiency, possession with injunction, Article 227 revision.
What did the court decide?
The impugned order requiring the petitioner to affix ad valorem court fee is in accordance with law and deserves to be upheld; moreover, no provision of law, much less any judgment, was shown to this Court that the impugned order is against law.