1 WP 6375/2011 abs FARAD CONTINUATION IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6375 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Orders Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's Orders Mr. Satyajeet M. Mirajkar for the petitioner. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J DATE : 8TH AUGUST 2011 P.C. : 1. In my view, the order against which the writ petition is directed is interlocutory and calls for no interference. 2. By prayer (a) in the suit, the petitioner had prayed that the sale deed dated 19th October 2007 be set aside and not binding on the petitioner. Such 2 WP 6375/2011 a prayer is required to be valued under section 6(iv)(ha) of the Bombay Court Fees Act. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner says that the petitioner has also sought a prayer for specific performance and therefore the suit is rightly valued on the contract price. In my view, the prayer of specific performance does not affect the valuation of the court fee inasmuch as under section 18 of the Bombay Court Fees Act if multiple reliefs are claimed, each relief must be valued separately and aggregate court fee on all reliefs must be payed. The petitioner was required to value the suit for each of the reliefs claimed and pay the court fee accordingly. The petitioner is required to value the suit separately under section 6(iv)(ha) of the Bombay Court Fees Act and pay the court fee on it also in view of section 18 3 WP 6375/2011 of the Court Fees Act. 4. There is no merit in the writ petition which is hereby rejected. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)