Allowed

M/S. Ganaraj Enterprises through Partner Shri Sanjay Ghorpade v. Shri Vithal Jayram Gavali and Ors.

Bombay HC29 Aug 2023WP/4806/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging a trial court order mandating suit valuation under Section 6(iv)(ha). The High Court relied on prior precedent to hold that Section 6(iv)(j) applies instead, quashed the impugned order, and remanded the matter for inquiry under the Suits Valuation Act.

What did the court decide?

The order directing plaintiff to value suit as per market value under Section 6(iv)(ha) was quashed. Proceedings remanded for inquiry under Suits Valuation Act, 1887.

M/S. Ganaraj Enterprises through Partner… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

10-wp4806-2016.doc

¶2

VRJ

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.4806 OF 2016

¶5

VAIBHAV RAMESH JADHAV

¶6

Digitally signed byVAIBHAV RAMESHJADHAVDate: 2023.08.3010:21:21 +0530

¶7

Ganaraj Enterprises Through Its Partner Sanjay Valaku Ghorpade … Petitioner V/s. Rajesh Vitthal Gavali & Ors. … Respondents

¶8

Mr. Rupesh Ramchandra Lanjekar for the petitioner. Mr. Mayuresh S. Lagu for the respondent No.26.

¶9

CORAM : AMIT BORKAR, J.

¶10

DATED : AUGUST 29, 2023

¶11

P.C.:

¶12

The petitioner/original plaintiff is challenging order dated 14^th December 2015 passed by the 3^rd Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Ulhasnagar, directing him to value the suit as per market value of the suit property and pay court fee stamp under section 6(iv)(ha) of Bombay Court Fees Act, 1959.

¶13

The Petitioner sought relief of injunction not to disturb rights conferred by agreement dated 14^th April 1999. Second prayer was in relation to sale deed dated 7^th October 2010. It is prayed that the said development agreement is not binding on the plaintiff.

¶14

The defendant in the said suit raised objection under the provisions of the Suits Valuation Act, 1887 and the Bombay Court Fees Act, 1959. The trial Court accepted the objection and directed

¶15

¶16

10-wp4806-2016.doc

¶17

the petitioner to value the suit as per market value of the suit property. Said order is subject matter of present writ petition.

¶18

Learned advocate for the petitioner relied on Division Bench judgment of this Court in case of Dilip Khushalchand (Srisrimal) Jain and Ors. vs. Hardik Deepakbhai Ramani and Ors. in Writ Petition No.8968 of 2018 (Aurangabad Bench) decided on 5^th May 2022. This Court in paragraph No.24 held as under:

¶19

“ 24. From the above discussion in our judgment, Section 6(iv)(ha) would be applicable only to the Plaintiff who is a party to the sale deed seeking declaration of avoidance of sale deed. It would not be applicable to the Plaintiffs who are not party to the instrument seeking declaration of avoidance of sale deed. Such Plaintiff would be governed by Section 6(iv)(j) as it is not susceptible to monetary evaluation.”

¶20

In view of the said judgment, clause 2 of the order directing the plaintiff to value the suit under section 6(iv)(ha) is not sustainable. The suit is governed by under section 6(iv)(j) of the Bombay Court Fees Act, 1959. The trial Court is required to consider provisions of the Suits Valuation Act, 1887 to decide valuation of the suit as the suit is being trite by the Court having limited pecuniary jurisdiction.

¶21

Therefore, the first part of the order directing plaintiff to value suit as per market value of the suit property is quashed and set aside.

¶22

The proceedings are remanded back to the trial Court for the limited purpose of holding inquiry under the provisions of the Suits Valuation Act, 1887 to decide valuation of the suit in accordance with law.

¶23

¶24

10-wp4806-2016.doc

¶25

The civil writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.

¶26

(AMIT BORKAR, J.)

¶27

M/S. Ganaraj Enterprises through Partner Shri Sanjay Ghorpade v. Shri Vithal Jayram Gavali and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Ganaraj Enterprises through Partner Shri Sanjay Ghorpade v. Shri Vithal Jayram Gavali and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Naiknavare Developers Private Limited and Ors. Vs Shantilal Ruchand Oswal and Ors.

Shri. Ismail Babalal Shaikh and Ors. Vs Shri. Dinkar Chandar Kamble

Shantaram Gangaram Patil Vs Sou. Alka Makrand Aswale and Ors.

Mr. Atul Agrawal and Anr. Vs Mr. Ranchhod Patel (Decd) Thru Lhrs and Ors.

Smt. Aktar Budan Fakir (Shah) through Poa Altaf B Shah (Fakir) and Ors. Vs Shri. Balasaheb Baburao Wagh

Santram Jaisingh Bhui (Since Deceased) Thr Lrs. Lachiram Santram Salampure and Ors. Vs Bhagirathibai Rajaram Bhui (Deceasd) Thr. Lrs. Kondiram Kaniram Bhui and Anr.