Vitthal Padoba Mokashi vs Kisan Anyaba Marathe And Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 12736 Bom

Bombay High Court

Vitthal Padoba Mokashi vs Kisan Anyaba Marathe And Ors on 13 December, 2023

Author: Amit Borkar

Bench: Amit Borkar

2023:BHC-AS:37429
                                                                                              37-wp7299-2022.doc


                                VRJ
                                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                                   CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                                       WRIT PETITION NO.7299 OF 2022
         VAIBHAV
         RAMESH
         JADHAV
         Digitally signed by
         VAIBHAV RAMESH
         JADHAV
         Date: 2023.12.13
         18:57:45 +0530




                                Vitthal Padoba Mokashi                         ... Petitioner
                                            V/s.
                                Kisan Anyaba Marathe & Ors.                    ... Respondents


                                Mr. Rajesh S. Datar i/by Mr. Akshay J. Kandarkar for
                                the petitioner.



                                                                CORAM    : AMIT BORKAR, J.

                                                                DATED    : DECEMBER 13, 2023
                                P.C.:

1. Defendant No.13 in a suit for partition raises an objection under section 8 of the Maharashtra Court Fees Act, 1959.

2. According to the petitioner, considering the reliefs claimed in the suit namely partition of agricultural land, only factor which needs to be decided by the Court for the purpose of valuation of the suit for the Court Fees is to ascertain whether the suit properties are agricultural land assessed to land revenue. Prima facie material on record indicates that the suit properties are agricultural lands assessed to land revenue. Therefore, payment of Court fees as per section 6(vii) read with (v) of the Maharashtra Court Fees Act, 1959 appears to be in accordance with law.

3. In so far as reliefs in terms of prayer clauses (d) and (e) are concerned, it appears that plaintiff was not party to the said

37-wp7299-2022.doc

conveyances. Therefore, in view of the judgment in the case of Dilip Khushalchand (Srisrimal) Jain and Others vs. Hardik Deepakbhai Ramani and Others reported in 2023 (3) ABR 672 the valuation of the Court Fees under section 6(iv)(ha) of the Maharashtra Court Fees Act, 1959 is not required to be made. Hence, the impugned order passed by the Trial Court does not suffer from error of jurisdiction.

4. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. No costs.

(AMIT BORKAR, J.)