MINOR SUBHA Vs. RAMU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 1. The plaintiff is the revision petitioner herein, who has filed a suit in O.S. No. 41 of 2002 before the Sub-court, Tiruvarur for partition. In the said suit, the respondents herein have filed a written statement, alleging that the petitioners ought to have paid Court fee under Section 37(1) of the Act. Pursuant to that notice dated 21.10.2002 was issued by the trial Court, directing the petitioner herein to value under Section 37(1) of Tamil Nadu Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act (in Short "the Act"). Objections were filed by the petitioners stating that they are in joint possession, the other family members have a right in coparcenary/joint family properties, without their consent alienated petitioners" share which is not binding on them in respect of their share is concerned, hence not liable to pay Stamp Duty under Section 37(1) of the Act and maintain the same to be paid under Section 37(2) of the Act is perfectly valid. The trial Court has directed the petitioner to pay deficit Court fee under Section 37(1) of the Act within a period of three weeks, the same is challenged in this C.R.P.

(2.) THE learned counsel Mr. Srinath Sridevan appearing for the petitioner submit that the trial Court without considering the petitioners objection passed a non-speaking impugned order; the petitioners are unmarried daughters as on 1.6.1990 became automatically co-owners to be treated on par with other male sharers; the petitioners are in joint possession of the said property; hence the impugned order directing the petitioner to pay deficit Court fee under Section 37(1) of the Act is liable to be set aside.