RAJU AND ANOTHER Vs. VENKATASWAMI NAIDU AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition arises from an order of the lower Court directing the plaintiffs to pay additional court -fee on the basis that S. 40 of the Court Fees Act of 1955 applied to the present case. The plaintiffs are the petitioners. The suit is one for a declaration that the sale deed dated 1st May 1954 for a sum of Rs. 4,000, in favour of the first defendant is void and not binding on the plaintiffs, and for possession of the property. The plaintiffs are the sons of one Subbu Mudali. Subbu Mudali and Tirupathi Animal, the mother of the plaintiffs, are alleged to have executed the sale deed on 1st May 1954 to the third defendant in the suit, Tirupathi Ammal, the mother, was mentioned in the sale deed as the guardian of the minor plaintiffs. In the suit, it was alleged that the sale was not binding on the minors as the transaction was void and, therefore, the declaration and possession of the property were prayed for. The suit was valued at a sum of Rs. 354 -6 -0, that is, thirty times its assessment of Rs. 11 -3 -0 and court -fee was paid on that value.

(2.) AN objection was taken by the Court -Fee Examiner to the court -fee paid and the learned District Munsif on a consideration of the matter held that the suit would properly come under S. 40 of the Court Fees Act, as it was obligatory upon the plaintiffs to set aside the document of sale. On that finding, the learned District Munsif directed the plaintiffs to value the property on the basis of the consideration mentioned in the sale deed, viz. Rs. 4000. The plaintiffs have filed this present revision petition against that order.