SIRIGINI VENKATARAMA MOHANDAS BEING MINOR, BY MOTHER AND NEXT FRIEND SIRIGINI SUGANAVATHI AND ANR. Vs. KAMINI KONDIAH AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question which arises is as to the liability or otherwise of the petitioners to pay enhanced Court fee under the provisions of Section 17 of the Court Fees Act. The section says that where a suit embraces two or more distinct subjects, the plaint shall be chargeable with the aggregate amount of the fees to which the plaints in suits embracing separately each of such subjects would be liable under the Act.

(2.) THE suit in the present case was brought by two plaintiffs against a number of defendants. It was alleged that the first plaintiff became the owner of the suit properties by reason of a settlement deed executed by his father. At the time the first plaintiff was a minor and his mother and guardian, the second plaintiff, entered upon the properties only to find the defendants in occupation under tenancies created by the settlor. There were other persons also in occupation of other properties comprised in the settlement, but these made no demur about atoning to the plaintiffs as tenants.* The defendants in the suit apparently refused or neglected to do so.

(3.) THE schedule has not been printed, but evidently there is a large number of properties and the extent of each is set out together with the names of the defendants in occupation of them. The plaint alleges that these defendants are trespassers and that they are bound to pay mesne profits for past years and compensation until date of delivery of possession. The plaintiff claims an aggregate sum of Rs. 30,893 -10 -9 being the total of the amounts claimed against each of the defendants. The plaintiff prayed among other things for delivery of possession and for ejectment of the defendants.