1 W.P.No.2613/10. FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.2613 OF 2010 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's orders Mr.S.P.Shah, advocate for the petitioner Mr.A.M.Gholap, advocate for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2. CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J. Date : 13.12.2011. PER COURT : 1. Heard. 2. The petitioner assails the order dated 8.12.2009, passed by the learned Judge below Exh.1 in RCS No.305/2000, directing the petitioner/plaintiff to make proper valuation and pay deficit Court fees. 3. It appears that when the suit is fixed for judgment, the Court passed the impugned order directing the plaintiff to value the suit properly. The Court came to the conclusion that the suit is undervalued. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in fact, no arguments were advanced before this order was passed. 2 W.P.No.2613/10. The case of the plaintiff is covered by Section 108(d) of the Transfer of Property Act i.e. principle of accession. Mr.Gholap, learned counsel for the Respondents disputes this position and submits that the principle of accession would not be applicable to this case, in view of the pleadings of the parties. 5. Be that as it may. It appears that this argument was not advanced before the trial Court, dehors the same the order has been passed. It would be appropriate to give opportunity to both the parties to make submissions in this regard. 6. In view of the above, the impugned order is quashed and set aside. The trial Court shall decide the issue of the valuation after giving opportunity to the parties to put forth their submissions on the same. The same shall be decided before the judgment is delivered on all other issues. 7. The Writ Petition is disposed of in above terms. However, there shall be no order as to costs. (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.) Dt.13.12.2011. asp/office/wp2613.10 3 W.P.No.2613/10.