JUDGMENT Mrs. Sabina, J.: - Petitioner has filed this petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India challenging the order dated 30.11.2012 whereby application moved by the petitioner under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (‘CPC’ for short), was dismissed. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that respondent No. 1 has filed suit for recovery of Rs. 37,00,000/- Hence, respondent No. 1 was liable to affix the requisite Court fee qua the said amount. 3. Learned counsel for respondent No. 1, on the other hand, has opposed the petition and has submitted that petitioner had stolen the blank signed cheque issued by respondent No. 1. Hence, respondent No. 1 was not required to affix ad valorem Court fee. 4. In the present case, respondent No. 1 has filed suit for declaration and consequential relief of permanent injunction and mandatory injunction. During the pendency of the suit, petitioner moved an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC which was dismissed by the Trial Court vide impugned order dated 30.11.2012. Hence, the present petition by the petitioner. 5. The prayer clause of the plaint Annexure P-1 reads as under:- “It is, therefore, prayed that a decree for declaration to the effect that the plaintiff is legally entitle to get transfer the amount of Rs. 37,00,000/- with interest of bank, fully detailed and described in para No. 1 of the plaint from the account/FDR in the name of the defendant No. 1, lying deposited with the defendant No. 2 in S.B. Account No. 62058593401, with a decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendant No. 2 from releasing the said amount to defendant No. 1 and further restraining the defendant No. 1 from withdrawing the above said amount with consequential relief of mandatory injunction directing the defendant No. 2 to transfer the aforesaid amount in the account of the plaintiff detailed and described in para No. 1 of the plaint may kindly be passed, in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants with costs of present suit.” 6. Thus, respondent No. 1 has virtually sought recovery of Rs. 37,00,000/- along with interest from the petitioner. Respondent No. 1 was, thus, required to affix the requisite Court fee on the said amount. Thus, respondent No. 1 has virtually sought recovery of Rs. 37,00,000/- along with interest from the petitioner. Respondent No. 1 was, thus, required to affix the requisite Court fee on the said amount. Learned Trial Court fell in error while dismissing the application moved by the petitioner on the ground that respondent No. 1 was not executant of the Fixed Deposit Receipt. 7. Accordingly, this petition is allowed. Impugned order dated 30.11.2012 is set aside. The application moved by the petitioner under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC is disposed of with a direction that respondent No. 1 is directed to affix ad valorem Court fee qua the amount sought to be recovered by him in question. Respondent No. 1 is granted two months time to do the needful. ————————