JUDGMENT : ASHOK KUMAR GAUR, J. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner-plaintiff seeking a direction to accept the court fee presented by the petitioner for initiating proceedings in Civil Suit filed in Commercial Court, Ajmer. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner-plaintiff submitted that the petitioner has filed a civil suit claiming relief of amount of Rs. 70,74,77,225/- and the Court fee for the said relief, comes to Rs. 39,90,000/-. 3. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner had purchased the Court fee from Stock Holding Corporation of India Limited which has been authorized to sale e-Court fee online by payment of necessary Court fee to the party concerned. 4. Learned counsel submitted that the list of e-Court fee counters have been set up in the High Court, Jaipur Bench, Rajasthan and another e-Court fee centre at Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur. 5. Learned counsel submitted that after paying online e-Court fee centre at Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, the petitioner had filed a civil suit along-with e-Court fee receipt. 6. Learned counsel submitted that on an objection being raised by the office of the Commercial Court that Court fee has been paid by the petitioner as e-Court fee, however, the Commercial Court having not received any information or any link available on their system/computer, the petitioner was constrained to move an application before the Commercial Court wherein request was made that the petitioner has already complied with by paying the necessary Court fee as e-Court fee and as such, the authorized Stock Holding Corporation of India Limited as Central Records Keeping Agency (CRA) for Computerization of Stamp Duty Administrative System (C-SDAS) was competent to do so. The Commercial Court was required to proceed further in the matter by issuing a notice on the Civil Suit filed by the petitioner. 7. Learned counsel submitted that, on such application being submitted, initially an objection was raised that the petitioner was to get necessary proof by way of showing the said Court fee properly paid by showing the system as locking/deface, however, subsequently by an order dated 17.12.2020 it has been again directed that, in case, the petitioner does not file proper proof of paying the Court-fee, the suit filed by the petitioner may be dismissed under Order 7 Rule 11(C) CPC for non-payment of Court fee. 8. 8. Learned counsel submitted that the proof of payment of Court fee by the petitioner is amply proved by virtue of annexing the copy of print which has been issued to the petitioner by depositing e-Court fee and as such, the Court below cannot presume that suit filed by the petitioner is not maintainable for want of payment of Court-fee. 9. Learned counsel further submitted that during COVID-10, the High Court on administrative side has issued notices to all the parties concerned of the cases to accept e-Court fee and the State wise e-Court fee centres were established. 10. Learned counsel submitted that at the time of filing of the suit by the petitioner, the necessary reguirement was only to pay e-Court fee and after compliance of such reguirement of depositing the money in the account of Stock Holding Corporation of India Ltd. at Jaipur Office, the petitioner's suit cannot be dismissed. 11. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material available on record. 12. This Court finds that vide order dated 17.12.2020, the petitioner was directed to get instructions from the High Court with respect to e-Court fee and it has been further directed that only on deface/locking being shown on the computer, the proof of depositing e-Court fee is accepted. 13. This Court finds that if the petitioner has produced receipt/print out of e-Court fee from the authorized person i.e. Stock Holding Corporation of India Ltd., the Court below ought not to have asked the petitioner to get further proof and as such, the Court could not have passed an order that suit of the petitioner can be dismissed under Order 7 Rule 11(C) CPC. 14. This Court finds that the Commercial Court, Ajmer can get the fact of paying the e-Court fee verified from Stock Holding Corporation of India Ltd, E-counter, Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur and as such, this liability solely may not be fastened on the petitioner. This Court finds that the suit of the petitioner cannot be dismissed only due to non-receipt of any communication from Stock Holding Corporation of India Ltd. 15. This Court finds that the suit of the petitioner cannot be dismissed only due to non-receipt of any communication from Stock Holding Corporation of India Ltd. 15. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Commercial Court, Ajmer to seek information from Stock Holding Corporation of India Ltd. and the fact of defacing from their system may also be verified as the Court fee may not be used in other cases. The Commercial Court can also ask the said Corporation to deface the Court fee if it has already not been done. The said clarification may be sought in expeditious manner, however, suit of the petitioner may not be dismissed by invoking the power under Order 7 Rule 11(C) CPC.