TWIST SPIN INDUSTRIES Vs. K M H ENTERPRISES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent of respective counsel.

(2.) By way of present petition, the petitioner challenges the order dated 28th September, 2007 vide which the learned 5th Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division Nagpur, has held that in the suit filed by the present petitioner/ plaintiff has to pay the court fees on the consideration amount of Rs. Five crores as per the provisions of section 6 (iv) (ha) read with section 6 (xi) of the Bombay Court Fees Act, 1959. (hereinafter referred to as . the Act. ). Learned trial Court has held the suit is under valued and, therefore, directed to pay court fees.

(3.) Shri A.C.Dharmadhikari, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that from the perusal of the plaint, it would be clear that the relief claimed by the petitioner was only for declaring that the defendant has no right to continue with the work of dismantling/ demolition of the standing structures in suit premises i.e. Empress Mill, without the consent and permission of the plaintiff. He submits that the further relief claimed was for declaration that the act on the part of the defendant to dismantling and demolition of the structures standing on the suit premises, was contrary to the terms of agreement entered into between the plaintiff and defendant. He, therefore, submits that taking into consideration the allegation made in the plaint, the suit was rightly valued under clause 6 (iv) (ha ) of the Act.