(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO. 11041 OF 2010 Shaikh Salim s/o. Mannu & .. Petitioners 2 others. (Original defendants) versus Omprakash s/o. Laxminarayan Baheti .. Respondents & 4 others. (Nos.1 and 2 - Original plaintiffs & Nos.3 to 5 - Original defendants) ....................... Mr. Sanjay V. Mundhe, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. G.K. Thigale, Advocate, for respondent no.2 / caveator. ........................ CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 5TH JANUARY 2011 COURT'S ORDER : 1. The order dated 16-12-2009, directing respondent / (2) plaintiff, to correct the valuation and to pay court fees, is being assailed along with the subsequent order passed below Exhibit 18-8-2010, by which the trial court has extended time to pay deficit court fees. 2. Mr. S.V. Mundhe, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners, states that the initial order dated 16-12-2009 is itself not correct and valuation as worked out therein is not accordance with the provisions of Bombay Court Fees Act and Suits Valuation Act. He further states that Exhibit 80 was not an application for condonation of delay and thus, there is non- application of mind. 3. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties and I find that the petitioner has, after alleged agreement with the respondent, disposed of the suit property in favour of some third person. Moreover, order dated 16-12-2009 is sought to be assailed in the Writ Petition which is filed on 18-10-2010 and, that too, after the court extended time for payment of court fees. 4. In this view of the matter, I am not inclined to interfere in exercise of writ jurisdiction. (3) 5. In the result, Writ Petition is dismissed. However, all contentions are kept open for due consideration in appropriate proceedings before proper forum. ( B.P. DHARMADHIKARI ) JUDGE ......................... bgp/wp11041