Final Order 1

Order Details: Order below exhibit
Pdf Text: .. 1..
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
ORDER BELOW EXH.10
IN
COMMERCIAL SUIT NO.478 OF 2021
Shree Vallabh Karwa
(Partner of M/s. Shree Vallabh Maheshwari),
An Adult Indian Inhabitant, Aged about 75 years,
Occ.: Business,
Having his office at:
509, Shah & Nahar (Worli),
Dr. E.Moses Road, Mumbai – 400 018. ......Plaintiff
Versus
1. M/s. Shree Vallabh Maheshwari
A Partnership Firm,
Having its Present Office at:
308, Regent Chamber, 208,
Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021.
2. Mr.Murlimanohar Bankatlal Karwa
Age 65 years, Occ.: Business,
Partner of M/s. Shree Vallabh Maheshwari
Residing at :
Karwa Kutir, Groud Floor, 174,
Tagore Park Marg, Near Model Town,
Delhi 110009. .....Defendant/s.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHRI RAJESH A. SASNE.
(C.R.NO.32).
DATE : 10th January, 2022.
Appearance:
Adv. Rohit Dalmiya for the plaintiff.
None for the defendant.
ORDER BELOW EXHIBIT10.
This is an application filed by the plaintiff requesting for return of
-- 1 of 3 --
Order below Exh.10 in .. 2..
Comm. Suit No. 478 of 2021.
plaint.
2. It is the contention of the plaintiff that the assets of defendant
no.1 is more than 2 Crore with respect to the immovable property
situated at APMC Market at Vashi. The movable assets are having value
of Rs.3 Crore or more. The plaintiff has annexed valuation reports with
the application. According to the plaintiff, the plaintiff's claim exceeds
pecuniary jurisdiction and therefore, he shall be allowed to return the
plaint.
3. Heard the Learned Advocate for the plaintiff. Read the
application (Exhibit 10). Read the valuation report attached with the
application. Read the plaint. In paragraph no. 14 of the plaint, the
plaintiff has made contention to dissolve the Partnership Firm
(Defendant no.1). It is the contention of the plaintiff that the valuation
of assets of the properties of first defendant is more than Rs.3 Lakh.
Considering the contentions regarding the valuation of assets of first
defendant alongwith valuation report on record, the suit will not be
within pecuniary jurisdiction of this Court. Hence, the plaintiff is
allowed to take back the plaint for filing it before the proper Court.
Hence, I pass the following order :
ORDER
1. The Application (Exhibit 10) is allowed.
2. The plaintiff is allowed to take back the plaint for filing it
before the proper Court.
3. Registrar(Civil) to comply with procedure for return of
-- 2 of 3 --
Order below Exh.10 in .. 3..
Comm. Suit No. 478 of 2021.
plaint.
4. The plaintiff to comply with the order.
5. Suit is removed from the board of this Court as ''return of
plaint''.
(Rajesh A.Sasne)
Judge,
City Civil & Sessions Court,
Date : 10.01.2022. Mumbai.
Dictated directly on computer on :10.01.2022
Typed on :10.01.2022
Signed by HHJ on :11.01.2022
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
11.01.2022 at 3.45 p.m. Mrs.P.R.Wagh
Name of the Judge (with Court Room no.) HHJ Shri R.A.Sasne.
(Court Room No.32).
Date of Pronouncement of Judgment/Order 10.01.2022
Judgment/Order signed by P.O. on 10.01.2022
Judgment/Order uploaded on 11.01.2022
-- 3 of 3 --