DASRATH PRASAD Vs. SHIVNANDAN MISHRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application in revision is directed against the latter part of the order dated 30th April, 1982 passed in Title Suit No. 31 of 1980 by the Subordinate Judge, Khagaria, calling upon the petitioners to pay ad valorem court-fee on the value of the properties said to have been purchased by them from the original plaintiff.

(2.) One Kunti Devi filed a suit for partition being Title Suit No. 31 of 1980 claiming 1/3rd share in the suit properties against her co-sharers. The suit was filed on 30-9-1980. On 3-10-1980 and 11-11-1980 she transferred an area of 15 bighas of land by four registered sale deeds to the petitioners. On 16-1-1981 she entered into a compromise with the original defendants and filed a petition in the suit making a prayer that the suit be disposed of in terms of the compromise. When the petitioners came to know about the said compromise they filed an application in the suit for being added as parties and on 13-1-1982 they were added as intervener defendants. On 2-2-1982 the original defendants filed an application in the court below and prayed that the intervener defendants, namely, the petitioners should be transposed as plaintiff inasmuch as the original plaintiff Kunii Devi had already compromised the suit, By order dated 30-4-1982 the petitioners were transposed as plaintiffs and the original plaintiff Kunti Devi as defendant in the suit. Consequent upon this in the later part of the order the Court also directed these petitioners to pay ad valorem court fee on the valuation of the properties purchased by them from the "original plaintiff. As stated above this latter part of the order has been challenged in the present application.

(3.) The only question for consideration is whether in the facts and circumstances of this case the petitioners are required to pay ad valorem court-fee under the provisions of the Court-fees Act.