Application by the advocte for defendant
dinesh
(Querist) 25 June 2014
This query is : Resolved
I had filed suit for possession of open land in civil court under transfer of property act as lease deed unregistered for the open land. On very first date advocate of defendant appeared filed application to dismiss the suit or return the plaint to plaintiff after the proper valuation. Their contention is that at the time of entering the lease deed the one structure was existing on the suit property which was of of previous lessee. So plaintiff have not done proper valuation of suit property and not affixed proper stamp. While in our agreement to lease in one clause it was clearly mentioned that Lessor is giving open land only. Is at very primary stage when ISSUES are not framed suit can be dismissed without giving chance to hear. As I have filed suit on my own without any advocate should I on next date file say? Pl advise.
R.K Nanda
(Expert) 25 June 2014
file strong reply to application of defendant in court on next date.
dinesh
(Querist) 09 October 2014
Please See whether this say for the above subjectis perfect?
IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE J. D. VASHI AT VASHI
Regular Civil Suit. No. 94/2014
Shri. Dinesh R. Trivedi Plaintiff
V/s.
Shri. Ajay V. Pendse and another Defendants
Say on behalf of Plaintiff to the application of plaintiff dated 20/06/2014
The application under reply is false, frivolous and not maintainable in law. The defendant No. 1 has not mentioned under which provisions of law the present application under reply is filed. The application deserves no consideration and same may be rejected with cost.
Without prejudice to the above contention the plaintiff beg to file his Para vise comments as under:
1. With reference to Para 1 of the application it is denied that the present suit is filed under the provisions of Transfer of Property Act. Plaintiff states that relationship between him and defendant No. 1 is of landlord and tenant. The tenancy was of open land, for which no protection is given to tenant under the provisions of Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999. The suit is valued on the basis of annual Lease Rent. The structure is owned by defendant No. 1 and plaintiff is seeking possession of open land given to defendant No. 1 on Lease basis and not seeking possession of suit premises. Therefore the suit is properly valued and question of market value of the suit structure does not arise. The present suit is filed under the provision of Maharashtra Control Act only and not under The Transfer of Property Act as falsely alleged in this para.
2. With reference to para 2 of the application contents therein are the denied. Plaintiff states that the tenancy was of open land tenancy and rent is calculated on the basis of agreed Lease Rent. The question of structure constructed prior to 1992 or market value of 2012 does not confer the jurisdiction of the court but the relationship between plaintiff and defendant No. 1 shall confer the jurisdiction and all the suits between landlord and tenant are filed before Civil Judge (J. D.) and therefore the suit filed before this Hon’ble Court is perfectly legal and valid and question of dismissing the suit or returning the plaint to plaintiff to pay proper valuation does not arise.
Under the circumstances the application deserves no consideration and same may be dismissed with cost.
Navi Mumbai
Date:- 09/10/2014 Plaintiff
