PARELKAR AND DALLAS Vs. GIRISH THAKORLAL VAKIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appeal arises in somewhat unusual circumstances.

(2.) THE Court Receiver has, by an interim order in the suit, been appointed receiver of the assets of a partnership firm which has immovable property at Lonavala. The Court Receiver was advised that he would be liable to pay wealth-tax thereon. For the purposes of its valuation, the Court Receiver appointed the appellants. The appellants are architects and valuers upon the panel of the Court Receiver. The appellants valued the immova?ble property in the sum of Rs. 60,64,500. 00. With their valuation report the appellants sent to the Court Receiver a bill for their fees in the sum of Rs. 30,870. 00 The valuation was disputed by the 1st and 2nd defendants. They took out a Notice of Motion in which they prayed that the acceptance by the Court Receiver of the appellant valuation report should be set aside and other valuation should be obtained. When the Notice of Motion came up for hearing before the learned single Judge two additional prayers were sought, namely, that the Court Receiver's direction to pay the appellants' bill should be set aside and that the appellants' valuation report should be set aside. In support of the Notice of Motion the 1st defendant filed an affidavit in which it was alleged that the appellants' valuation was not proper and their bill was exorbitant. It stated that the appellants were entitled to a fee in the sum of Rs. 7,893. 00, having regard to the fact that all registered valuers of property for taxation purposes could charge fees only in terms of a notifica?tion issued by the Central Government.

(3.) THE learned Judge, after hearing counsel, including counsel for the appellants, made the Notice of Motion absolute in these terms :