Hon'ble Het Singh Yadav,J.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the plaintiff filed a suit for declaration of ownership and also for declaration of Agreement to Sale dated 20.12.2006 and 28.9.2007 null and void.
Issue no. 3 was framed with regard to the valuation and payment of Court fee. The said issue has been decided in favour of the plaintiff on 7.12.2011 and court fee was found sufficient. The said order has not been challenged by any of the party. Subsequently, the defendant no. 6 filed an amendment application for amendment in the written statement. The said amendment has been allowed on 11.1.2012 and after allowing the amendment a fresh issue no. 4 with regard to the valuation and the court fee has been framed by the trial court which has been decided by the impugned order dated 15.2.2012 which is being challenged in the present appeal. He submits that the order dated 11.1.2012 by which the trial court allowed the amendment application has been challenged by the appellant in W.P. No. 23043 of 2012, Smt. Krishna Devi and others Vs. Dinanath Pandey and others which has been entertained by this Court in which the notices have been issued and as an interim measure, the proceedings of Original Suit No. 222 of 2009, Smt. Krishna and others Vs. Deenath Pandey and others pending before Additional Civil Judge/Additional C.J.M. Gautam Budh Nagaar has been stayed.
In view of above, he submits that the present appeal may be connected alongwith W.P. No. 23043 of 2012.
connect this appeal with W.P. No. 23043 of 2012. Issue notices to the respondent. The appellant may take steps to serve by ordinary course as well as by Registered Post.
Since the matter relates to the Court Fee, the State is the interested party and should be made as a party. The appellant is directed to implead the State as respondent no.7 and serve a copy to the learned standing counsel.
Order Date :- 14.5.2012 R