IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO. 164 OF 2009 MR. JOSE BELARMINO ANTAO AND ANR., ... Petitioners Versus FLORIANO GAMBETA DA PIEDADE AVILA AND ANR., ... Respondents Shri Shambhu S. Kakodkar, Advocate for the Petitioners. Coram:- N. A. BRITTO, J. Date:- 19th March, 2009 P.C.:- This is Defendants Writ Petition and is directed against Order dated 25-2-2009 of the learned Civil Judge, Jr. Division, Margao, by which the learned Civil Judge has accepted the corrected valuation of the suit at Rs.75,000/-. Heard Shri S. S. Kakodkar, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners/Defendants. It appears that the Plaintiffs had sought recovery of possession of a portion of the house and the land appurtenant thereto in the alternative, and had valued the said relief initially at Rs.1000/-. The Defendants' contention was that the relief ought to have been valued at Rs.15,00,000/- though such a specific plea was not taken in the written statement. At one stage, parties were given opportunity to lead evidence in support of the issue of undervaluation. Subsequently the Plaintiffs corrected the valuation in terms of the Order dated 10-9-2008 to Rs.75,000/- and paid requisite Court Fees thereon. The learned trial Court by the impugned Order has accepted the said valuation. Earlier, Defendant No.1 was examined, and he had stated that he had consulted a valuer who had told him that the valuation of the suit house was Rs.15,00,000/-. Obviously such a valuation could not have been accepted by the trial Court as the evidence given by the Defendants was a hearsay. The trial Court accepted the new valuation given by the Plaintiffs. It is not the case of the Defendants, not at least in this Writ Petition, that they were deprived of from leading evidence on the said preliminary issue to prove the plea taken by them that the portion of the house and the land appurtenantly thereto had to be valued at Rs.15,00,000/-. Nothing prevented the Defendants to have examined an expert to prove the plea taken by them. Only because the suit premises were situated in the town of Margao, that would not be sufficient to accept the Defendants' contention that the same should be valued at Rs.15,00,000/-. In my view, the impugned Order dated 25-2-2009, in the circumstances of the case, cannot be faulted. There is no merit in this Writ Petition and the same is hereby dismissed. N. A. BRITTO, J. RD.