B NOOKAMBA Vs. B DURGAMBA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) .This revision petition arises against the Order dated 7-6-1995 passed in I.A.S.R. No.525 of 1995 in O.S. No.29 of 1985 on me file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Amaapuram.

(2.) The said Suit was filed for partition and after a long drawn battle, the parties entered into compromise by excluding some properties from partition. A memo was filed before the trial Court, which was accompanied by the terms of compromise, for recording compromise and to pass a preliminary decree in terms thereof. The lower Court recorded the compromise. However, the Office of the Subordinate Judge, Amalapuram called for deposit of non-judicial stamps for engrossing the decree. Then the above I.A.S.R. was filed stating mat what was sought to be passed was only a preliminary decree and not a final decree; as such, the question of payment of either Court fee or deposit of non- judicial stamps does not arise. But, the Court below did not accede to the said contention and rejected the said application; against which, this revision is preferred.

(3.) Mr. V.L.N. Gopala Krishna Murthy, the learned Counsel for the petitioner, submits, that in a preliminary decree, the insistence of the Court below for payment of Court fee or deposit of non-judicial stamps was unwarranted and that the lower Court had exceeded its jurisdiction. He also submits mat when the compromise was entered into and a petition was filed, the Court was only enjoined to verify as to whether or not the compromise was entered into voluntarily and whether or not the parties thereto know the contents of the terms of the compromise and as the compromise related to only passing of the preliminary decree, the question of payment of either the Court fee or deposit of non-judicial stamps does not arise at all.