1 6 wp 5558.10.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION srk WRIT PETITION NO.5558 OF 2010 Vinayak Gopal Dandekar & Anr. ..Petitioners. v/s. Mrs. Mrudula @ Sujata Chandrashekhar ..Respondent. .... Mr. P.M. Arjunwadkar for the Petitioners. .... CORAM : J.H.BHATIA, J. DATE : 31ST AUGUST, 2010. P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioners. 2 The Respondent filed Special Civil Suit No. 18 of 2007 seeking declaration that the Will dated 08.11.1996 is sham, bogus, false, fabricated, void, illegal and not subsisting and she also claimed perpetual injunction against the Defendants from claiming any right on the basis of that Will and from creating any third party interest in the property on the basis of that Will. Initially, the suit was valued at Rs.3,00,000/- for the purpose of 2 6 wp 5558.10.doc declaration under section 6(iv)(ha) of the Bombay Court Fees Act, 1959 and for Rs.1,000/- for the other reliefs. Later on, the Plaintiff made amendment in para 13 of the Plaint and brought the case under section 6(iv)(j) of the Bombay Court Fees Act, 1959 stating that suit is not susceptible to voluntary evaluation. The suit was thereafter transferred by the Civil Judge Senior Division to the Civil Judge Junior Division. The Defendant/Petitioner took objection to the valuation. That objection was rejected by the Civil Judge Junior Division. 3 On hearing the learned counsel for the Petitioner/Defendant and perusal of the prayers made in the plaint, I find no fault with the impugned order because the Plaintiff is not claiming any right, title or interest on the basis of the said Will. According to her, the Will is false, forged and fabricated and the Plaintiff should not claim any right on the basis of that. Taking into consideration the facts, the suit is not susceptible to voluntary valuation. 4 Therefore, Writ Petition stands dismissed. [ J.H.BHATIA, J. ]