JUDGMENT

1. By the present Writ Petition, the petitioner who is the original plaintiff to the Suit is aggrieved by the order passed by the City Civil Court at Mumbai on a Notice of Motion seeking rejection of the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 of the CPC, pursuant to which a direction came to be issued to the plaintiff to pay deficit Court fee in relation to the claim for both the gift deeds under challenge, failing which it was directed that the plaint shall be rejected. Being aggrieved by the said order, he filed a Review Petition which is also rejected on 30/8/2021.

2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard learned counsel Shri Rajesh Patil for the petitioner and Advocate Dr.Uday Warunjikar for respondent no.1 and Advocate Hemal Ganatra for respondent nos.2 to 4. In the longish facts involved, it would be sufficient to state that the plaintiff was married to defendant no.1. and defendant nos.2, 3 and 4 are the relatives of defendant no.1. The dispute resulting in institution of a Suit by the plaintiff revolve around the troubled relationship, when it is alleged by the plaintiff that he had purchased two flats in Mumbai Suburban, out of which the subject flat was gifted to him