NANDKUMAR KHIARAM KALATI Vs. ATLANTIC APPARELS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Summary Suit has been circulated on lodging number as one of the objections raised by the Registry is that each of the plaintiffs have to pay separate Court fees for separate claims raised in the suit. Mr.Jagtiani, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Plaintiffs, relies upon decisions of this Court under Sec. 18 of the Maharashtra Court Fees Act with respect to multifarious suits. For the sake of convenience, the said Sec. is quoted as under :

(2.) Mr.Jagtiani would submit that under proviso to Article 1 to Schedule I, the maximum Court fees that could be leviable on any plaint or memorandum of appeal would be Rs.3,00,000.00. Learned Senior Counsel relies upon the decision of this Court in the case of Syndicate Bank and Ors. vs. S.S.Printers and Ors.,1995(3) BomCR 429. and a more recent decision of this Court in the case of Maldar Barrels Private Ltd. vs. Pearson Drums and Barrels Pvt. Ltd.,Com.Summary Suit (L) No.6044 of 2022 decided on 13/7/2022. in support. Mr.Jagtiani fairly refers to the decision of this Court in the case of Heena Narendra Patel (In the matter between) Pushpaben Vishwambarlal Khetan and Ors. vs. Heena Narendra Patel and Ors.,Chamber Summons No.803 of 2014 in Suit No.3474 of 2005 decided on 2/2/2015. which he submits was a case where there were a number of Plaintiffs who had sued the Defendants for defamation, and this Court had observed that each of the Plaintiff had to prove that the Defendants had defamed each of the Plaintiff and each of the Plaintiff had also to justify the amount of damages claimed, and therefore, would have to pay separate Court fees. He would, however, submit that the said case pertains to separate cause of action in the case of defamation and is distinguishable from the facts of this case. Learned Senior Counsel would submit that paragraph 10 of the said decision also records that the said decision is restricted only to a suit for defamation and points out that the said paragraph clearly records that in a suit for breach of contract, perhaps the situation might be different. For the sake of ready reference, paragraph 10 of the said order is usefully quoted as under :

(3.) On a query from the Court as to whether there are decisions other than the case of defamation where multiple plaintiffs have sued for different causes of action, Mr.Jagtiani, learned Senior Counsel, seeks some time to revert on the same. At his request, list on 12/9/2023 at 2.30 p.m.