A.U. SMALL FINANCE BANK LIMITED v. PARVEJ KHAN KHARKHARE S/O SH. BABU KHAN KHARKHARE
CR/170/2022 · 2025-08-19
Narendra Singh Dhaddha
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 23994 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 23994 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:32111] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 170/2022
1. A.u. Small Finance Bank Limited, Registered Office At 19- A, Dhuleshwar Garden, Ajmer Road, Jaipur Through Managing Director.
2. Deputy Vice President, Human Resources Department, Au Small Finance Bank Limited, Registered Office At 19-A, Dhuleshwar Garden, Ajmer Road, Jaipur.
3. Au Financiers (India) Limited, Through Authorized Representative, Address B-11-E, Near Ceg Building, Malviya Nagar Industrial Area, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur. ----Petitioners/Defendants Versus Parvej Khan Kharkhare S/o Sh. Babu Khan Kharkhare, R/o H. No. 146, Ward No. 15, Magariya, Shajapur, Madhya Pradesh-
465001. ----Respondent/Plaintiff For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rahul Kamwar For Respondent(s) : Mr. Devendra Bhardwaj HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA
Judgment Date of Judgment :: 19/08/2025 This civil revision petition has been filed by the petitioners- defendants (for short ‘the defendants’) against the order dated 04.05.2022 passed by the Civil Judge (South), Jaipur Metro-I, Jaipur in civil suit No. 5/2022 whereby the application filed by the defendants under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC has been dismissed.
Learned counsel for the defendants submits that the respondent- plaintiff (for short ‘the plaintiff’) filed a suit for declaration, permanent and mandatory injunction against the
[2025:RJ-JP:32111] (2 of 3) [CR-170/2022] defendants in which the defendants filed an application under
Order 7 Rule 11 CPC but the trial Court vide order dated 04.05.2022 wrongly dismissed the application filed by the defendants.
Learned counsel for the defendants submits that by way of civil suit, plaintiff wanted to get declared the termination letter dated 18.03.2021 as null and void. He also claimed salary of 90 days and bonus etc. On account of these financial benefits, valuation of the suit would be more than Rs. 2 Lakhs. So, the Civil Judge has no pecuniary jurisdiction to try it.
Learned counsel further submits that plaintiff has also not paid the court fees as per the valuation of the suit. So, the petition filed by the defendants be allowed and suit filed by the plaintiff be dismissed or the plaint be returned to the plaintiff for its presentation before the competent court having jurisdiction after payment of requisite court fees.
Learned counsel for the defendants has placed reliance on the judgment passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of ‘M/s Fiber India Division of M/s. Micro Star Marketing Ltd. Vs. The Deputy General Manager (R) Raj. Finance Corp. & Anr.’ in SB Civil Revision Petition No. 271/2000 decided on 12.07.2002.
Learned counsel for the plaintiff has opposed the arguments advanced by counsel for the defendants and submitted that the trial Court rightly dismissed the application filed by the defendants. The trial Court while dismissing the application rightly came to the conclusion that plaintiff had paid the court fees. So, the present petition is devoid of merit and liable to be dismissed.
[2025:RJ-JP:32111] (3 of 3) [CR-170/2022] I have considered the arguments advanced by counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order. It is an admitted position that by way of the suit, the plaintiff wanted to get declared the termination letter dated 18.03.2021 as null and void. He also sought the relief of payment of 90 days’ salary as well as bonus and total amount of which would be more than Rs. 2 Lakhs but the plaintiff had not paid the court fees on the aforesaid valuation. Further the Civil Judge has no pecuniary jurisdiction to try such matter. So, in my considered opinion, the trial Court has wrongly dismissed the application filed by the defendants. The petition filed by the defendants is allowed. The order dated 04.05.2022 passed by the trial Court is set aside and the trial Court is directed to return the plaint to the plaintiff for filing the same before the competent court having jurisdiction after payment of requisite court fees. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.
(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J Ritu/89