LAWS(MAD)-1953-2-16

CHANDRA BHOGI AND ANR. Vs. GUDDAPPA BHANDARY

Decided On February 24, 1953
Chandra Bhogi And Anr. Appellant
V/S
Guddappa Bhandary Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE are references under Section 5, Court -fees Act. O. S. No. 201 of 1949 was filed on the file of the court of the Subordinate Judge of South Kanara for division of the plaint B Schedule Immovable properties and the C Schedule in moveables into 16536 shares and for allotment to the plaintiff 851 shares therefrom and to direct the first defendant to account for the income of the family properties realised by him and sale proceeds of the clay sold by him from items 13 and 14 of the B Schedule to defendants 99 to 102, and other incidental reliefs. The suit was valued in respect of the relief of partition at a sum of Rs. 100. On 30 -7 -1952 the learned Subordinate Judge passed a supplementary preliminary decree whereunder, defendants 1, 4 and 8 were directed to render accounts to the family for the sale proceeds of clay realised by them and they were also made liable to pay the other members of the family their shares of Rs. 21600 after deducting their own share. Defendants 1, 4 and 8 preferred separate appeals to the High Court. The appeal preferred by the first defendant is S. R. No. 3174 of 1953 and that by defendants 4 and 8 is S. R. No. 1257 of 1953. Both the memoranda of appeal were stamped on a fixed court -fee of Rs. 100 under Article 17 -B of the II Schedule to the Court -fees Act. The office took the view that as the appeals were directed against the decree for specific amounts, 'ad valorem' court fee should be paid.

(2.) THE relevant provisions of the Court -fees Act read as follows: <FRM>JUDGEMENT_16_LAWS(MAD)2_1953.htm</FRM>

(3.) BEARING the aforesaid principles in mind I shall now proceed to consider the cases cited. In - - 'Ramaswami v. Rangachariar',, AIR 1940 Mad 113 (C), a Full Bench of this court laid down the mode of valuation of the reliefs in a suit for partition. There a Hindu minor sued through his mother as next friend for partition of the properties of the joint family consisting of himself, his father and his three brothers and for possession of his one -fifth share therein. He also joined as defendants several other persons (strangers to the family) either as alienees of family properties or as creditors of the family. His prayers were for: