B. R. Gavai, J. - (1.) By way of present petition, the petitioner seeks an exception to the order dated 7th August 2009, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kannad, below Exhibit 91 in Regular Civil Suit No. 150/2006, thereby rejecting the application filed by the petitioners (original defendants)for directing enquiry into the valuation of the suit property under Section 8 and 9 of the Bombay Court Fees Act, 1959 (For short, hereinafter referred to as "the said Act"), and for rejection of plaint under Order 7, Rule 11(b) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, on the ground that the suit was not accompanied by requisite court fees.
(2.) The plaintiff has filed a suit for possession on the basis of title. The suit is resisted by the present petitioners. After the issues were framed, an application came to be filed by the present petitioners, contending therein that the suit ought to be valued under Section 6(iv)(d) of the said Act and the court fees on the basis of market value of the land, in question, ought to have been paid by the petitioners along with the plaint. It was, therefore, prayed for directing an enquiry and also for rejection of plaint. The application was resisted by the respondent plaintiff. The said application is rejected. Hence, the present petition.
(3.) Mr. U. N. Shete, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners, submits that since from the perusal of the plaint, it can be seen that the plaintiff is claiming a declaration of ownership, the suit ought to have been valued under Section 6(iv)(d) of the said Act. He submits that since the plaintiff has not paid the requisite court fees, the plaint was required to be rejected in view of provisions of Order 7, Rule 11(b) of the Code of Civil Procedure. He relies on the judgment of the Apex Court, in the case of Corporation of the City of Bangalore Vs. M. Papaiah and another, 1989 AIR(SC) 1809), and the judgment of learned Single Judge of this court, in the cases of (i) Pushparaj Surajprasad Modh Vs. Sayyad Altaf Sayyad Wazir and others, 2000 4 MhLJ 492, (ii) Samrat Furniture, Nagpur and others Vs. Bhaurao Natthuji Mankar, 2001 3 MhLJ 456 , and (iii) Mahesh s/o. Apparao Suryawanshi Vs. Tulsabai w/o. Bhagwanrao Suryawanshi & others, 2005 3 AllMR 804.;