SAMPANGI GOWDA Vs. MUDDANNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiffs have filed a suit for partition and separate possession of their legitimate share in the suit schedule properties.

(2.) IN Paragraph No. 8 of the plaint, it is averred that the plaintiffs are the members of the joint family and they are in joint possession and cultivation of the suit schedule properties having their 1/4th legitimate right. It is alleged by the plaintiffs that, defendants solely enjoyed the suit schedule property without dividing the properly though the suit schedule property is the joint family property. Therefore, they valued the suit for the purpose of jurisdiction at Rs. 35 Lakhs and for the purpose of Court fee, they valued the suit under Section 35(2) of the Karnataka Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1958 (for short, hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') and paid ad valorem fixed Court fee of Rs. 200/ -.

(3.) ON the additional Issue Nos. 1 & 2, the Trial Court recorded a finding that the plaintiffs are not in possession of the suit schedule properties along with the defendants. Therefore, they have to pay the Court fee on the market value of the suit schedule property. In its opinion, the Court fee paid by the plaintiffs under Section 35(2) of the Act was not sufficient. Plaintiffs have to pay the Court fee under Section 35(1) of the Act. Ultimately, the suit came to be dismissed. Aggrieved by the said judgment and decree, the plaintiffs have preferred this Regular First Appeal.