G BHOOM REDDY Vs. MADAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition to revise the order of the Subordinate Judge, Nizamabad directing the plaintiff to pay additional Court fee. The suit was for partition and possession of the plaintiff's share in the joint family properties, after setting aside certain alienations made in favour of defendants 4 to 9. The plaintiff had valued the suit under Section XXXIV(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act and paid a fixed court fee Rs. 200/-. The Court fee Examiner on examining the adequacy of the Court fees paid, issued a check slip stating that the plaintiff has to value the properties sold to defendants 4 to 9 separately and pay court fee thereon as required under Sections 29, 34(2) 11 and 17 read with section (3) of the Court fees Act. The court on examining the contentions upheld the check slip and directed the plaintiff to pay additional court fee required* Hence this petition to revise that order.

(2.) In the plaint it is alleged that the plaint schedule properties also form part of the joint family properties and after the death of the plaintiff's father, defendants 1 to 3 who are the step-mother, mother, step-sister of the plaintiff, had alienated the property shown in the A Schedule in favour of defendants 4 to 9, without necessity to do so and they are not binding on him and defendants 4 to 9 can claim no right in those properties and asked tor the relief that the entire A schedule properties be declared as .the join family properties available for partition find the plaintiff,s 2/3rd share he ascertained and partitiond by metes and bounds and the plainteef be put in possession of his 2/3rd share, This will show that apart from the relief of partition which was valued under Section 34 (2) of the Act, the plaintiff has also asked for setting aside the alienations in favour of defendants 4 to 9 and taking possession of these properties and partitioning them and putting him in possession of his share. He also made the alienees defendants 4 to 9 parties to the suit. He is thereby seeking effective adjudication of the disputes regarding the alienations said to have been made by defendants 1 to 3 in favour of defendants 4 to 9. He is therefore liable to pay separate Court fee for this relief.

(3.) It is section 34 that applies to a partition suit. In a suit for partition where there is an additional relief for setting aside certain alienations and for partitioning those properties and putting the plaintiff in possession of his share, the suit for partition is to be Valued under Section 34(2) of the Act and the other reliefs have to be valued under Section 34(3). As per Section 34(3) separate fees shall be pay able on the relief of cancellation in the manner specified under Section 37. Under Section 37 the Court fee shall be computed on the value of the subject matter and such value shall be deemed to be the plaintiff's share in such property Therefore in such cases where the plaintiff asks for setting aside the alienations and ask for a share, he has to compute the value at the market value and pay court-fee on the value of his share and not as per Section 29 of the Act.