PAYIDIMARRI MADHAVA SARMA Vs. VELURI SESHAGIRIRAYADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a Revision Petition against the order of the lower Court calling upon the plaintiffs to pay court-fee upon a sum of Rs. 3612 in the following circumstances:

(2.) The first defendant is the maternal uncle of the plaintiffs and was in management of their property for a number of years. The suit is substantially one calling upon him to render an account of his management. It has been valued as a suit for accounts and court-fee paid on that basis. The question, now for consideration arises with reference to certain allegations made in paragraph 5 and an alternative prayer (d) in paragraph 17 of that plaint.

(3.) Paragraph 5 of the plaint relates in particular to one item of mismanagement or improper conduct on the part of the first defendant, namely, in respect of a pro-note for Rs. 2,100 said to have been executed by the 5 defendant in favour of the plaintiffs. It is alleged that the first defendant practically misappropriated this amount by destroying the genuine note and having another note for Rs. 2,000 executed in his own favour for the said amount and a note for Rs. 500 in favour of his Viyyankudu. It is accordingly stated that "the first defendant is while rendering accounts bound to pay the said amount of Rs. 2,100 with interest". The paragraph next refers to the fact that the first defendant had taken a sale-deed of certain lands from the 5 defendant in satisfaction of this pro-note claim. With reference to this land, the plaint claims that the 5 defendant should be held to have made the purchase as a trustee for the plaintiffs and that the plaintiffs are accordingly entitled to possession and mesne profits. Hence the prayer (d).