CHANDRABHAGABAI PANDURANG SHEVARE Vs. MANOJ GANGADHAR BURKULE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are the original plaintiffs. The 1st and 2nd respondents are the original defendants. The State of Maharashtra has been added as a party to this Writ Petition. The petitioners and 3rd and 4th respondents filed a suit for declaration and injunction against the 1st and 2nd respondents. The declaration sought is that the agreement for sale dated 9th October 2007 and sale deed dated 11th December 2007 allegedly obtained by the 1st and 2nd respondents from the plaintiffs are illegal and the same are not binding on the plaintiffs. A prayer for perpetual injunction was made as a consequential relief. In paragraph 8 of the plaint it is asserted that the plaintiffs belong to Scheduled Tribe and therefore, there is exemption granted under section 46 of the Bombay Court Fees Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act of 1959) from the payment of Court fees.

(2.) The 1st and 2nd respondents made an application under Rule 11 of Order VII of the Code of Civil Procedure,1908 (hereinafter referred to as the said Code) praying for rejection of the plaint on the ground that the Court fee payable on the plaint was not paid. An application was made by the plaintiffs at Exh.32 contending that the caste certificate issued to the 3rd Plaintiff by the Competent Authority has been produced on record. It was contended that the caste certificate issued by the Competent Authority was sufficient to prove the caste of the plaintiffs. In the said application at Exh. 32 it was prayed that the report of the superintendent of the Court be called for. Another application was made by the plaintiffs at Exh.35 on 14th October 2009 contending that the caste certificate issued by the Competent Authority in respect of the 2nd plaintiff was produced which shows that the 2nd plaintiff was belonging to Mahadeo Koli which is a scheduled tribe. A prayer was made for making a reference to the Caste Scrutiny Committee.

(3.) The application made by the 1st and 2nd defendants at Exh.15-A for rejection of the plaint was taken up for hearing. By the impugned Judgment and Order dated 25th November 2009, the petitioners were directed to pay requisite stamp duty within the period of one month failing which the plaint shall stand rejected. The said order has been impugned in this petition.