FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGBAD. __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Office notes, office Memoranda of coram, appearance, court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders. or directions and Registrar’s orders ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ WRIT PETITION NO.1602/2010 1. Heard counsel for the petitioners. Order passed by the learned Civil Judge (J.D.), Muktainagar dated November 20, 2009 below Exh.16 in RCS No.9/2005 is impugned in this writ petition. 2. Copy of the suit i.e. RCS No.9/2005 is annexure 'A'. Suit is for partition and declaration. This petition is filed by the original defendants No.1 and 2. From the copy of the plaint annexure A it appears that agricultural landed properties are the subject matter of the suit. Apart from the agricultural land in paragraph No.3 counsel points out house property G.P house No.115 ad measuring 368 sq. mtrs. is also described. With the assistance of counsel for the petitioners, I have seen prayers made in the suit. Suit is filed on March 28, 2005. Learned counsel for the petitioners takes me to paragraph No.10 of the plaint. He also points out application filed under order 7 (11) (a) (b) r.w. section 6 of the Bombay Court Fees Act. In this application present petitioners have raised two contentions. First, there is no cause of action, secondly suit is not properly valued. Market price of the suit property is around Rs. 3,83,000/-. As against this, respondent-original plaintiff has shown marked value of the suit property as Rs.20,000/- which is incorrect. It is further submitted that learned Civil Judge (J.D.) is having jurisdiction to entertain the suit valued up to Rs.1.00 lac. According to contention of present petitioner, Court i.e. learned Civil Judge (J.D.) does not have power and jurisdiction to entertain the suit. 3. Application filed by the present petitioners has been rejected by the trial court. 4. I have seen the order passed by the trial court. In paragraph No.5 ,of the order trial court has referred to order 7 Rule 11 (b) (c). FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGBAD. __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Office notes, office Memoranda of coram, appearance, court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders. or directions and Registrar’s orders ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Trial court, recording a finding that there is no case for rejection of the plaint as requested by the petitioner, rejected the application. 5. Counsel for the petitioners took me to section 6 (iv). He submitted that house property is the subject matter of the suit and market value ought to have considered. In that case court has no jurisdiction. Learned Civil Judge J.D. has no power and jurisdiction. Copy of the gift deed is also on record page 34. Value of the property is shown in this document as Rs.1,85,000/-. 6. Determination of Court fees is a matter of section 6 and principally prayers made by the plaintiff. I have given consideration to the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner. I have considered the provisions laid down under order 7 (11) (a) (b) and (c). Cause of action has been specifically pleaded by the plaintiff in the plaint itself. In my view, order impugned is legal, proper and does not require any interference at the hands of this Court. 7. Writ petition stands dismissed without any order as to costs. ( S. B. DESHMUKH, J. ) * * * Dt :- 24.02.2010 aaa/1602.10