Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Smt. Shiv Nandani And Others v. Krishna Murari - WRIT - C No. 14178 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 5640 (8 March 2006)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).



Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners.

This petition challenges the order of the trial court dated 19.4.2005 whereby the petitioners' application for obtaining Commissioner's report in respect of assessment of valuation of the property in suit, was rejected as well as the order dated 14.2.2006 passed by the revisional court whereby the petitioners' revision against the aforesaid order of the trial court was dismissed.

The petitioners' application was for obtaining the report regarding valuation of the suit property. Whether or not the valuation of the property was required to be assessed, is a weighty question which can be answered only when the court takes up the matter of the valuation and payment of court fees, if so raised in the suit, for decision. It is also not decipherable on the record that the issues have been framed or not. However, there is a pleading in the written statement regarding the undervaluation of suit property and insufficient payment of court fees. The matters will be decided by the trial court. If the property is to be assessed for its value it will definitely be done when that question comes for decision and not before that. In case the court finds it proper that the property in suit has to be valued for the purposes to decide that issue of undervaluation and insufficient payment of court fees, in that event only the report of the Commissioner or Valuer shall be obtained. Therefore, the application of the petitioners for obtaining the report ab out valuation, if has been rejected at this stage, it is not going to make any difference. The petitioners-defendants may press the issue before the trial court after it is framed and if the occasion so arise, it will again be open to the said court to obtain such report.

With the aforesaid observations, this writ petition is disposed of.




Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.