Madhukar Digambar Chavan v. Sou. Sunita Wilson Gaikwad

Dusane 1/2 22 cra 20.2021.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.20 OF 2021 Madhukar Digambar Chavan .... Applicant Vs.

Sou. Sunita Wilson Gaikwad & Anr..... Respondents Mr. Bhooshan R. Mandlik for Applicant.

Coram : NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.

Date : 12TH FEBRUARY, 2021 P.C.:

1.

The Applicant initiated Regular Civil Suit No. 76 of 2020 for permanent injunction seeking protection of possession. The Respondents-defendants initiated counter-claim seeking declaration that the sale-deed executed by the Applicant in favour of Defendant no. 2 is not binding on Defendant No. 1.

Questioning the maintenabilty of this counter-claim, the Petitioner moved an application under Order VII, Rule 11 (D) of Code of Civil Procedure alleging that Respondent-Defendant No.1 has under valued the suit claim.

Dusane 2/2 22 cra 20.2021.doc The submissions are, the suit counter-claim should have been valued on the market rate of the suit property in the light of prayer made in the counter-claim.

What can be noticed from the observations of the trial Court and the prayer made in the counter-claim that the only relief of declaration of not binding of sale-deed between the Petitioner and Defendant No.2 is made.

That being so, the order of rejection of application under Order VII, Rule 11(D) Code of Civil Procedure appears to be justified. No case for interference is made out. The Petition fails, dismissed.

( NITIN W. SAMBRE, J. )