KANDASWAMI UDAYAN Vs. ANNAMALAI PILLAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question that arises in this revision petition is one of pecuniary jurisdiction. It is conceded that if Section 7(iv-A) of the Court-Fees Act applies to the relief claimed in the plaint, the District Munsiff's Court of Salem., will have no jurisdiction to entertain the suit.

(2.) The suit was for partition of the properties by metes and bounds into four equal shares and for the allotment of three such shares to the plaintiffs. It is alleged in the plaint that the properties described therein were the ancestral properties of the plaintiffs and their father, the first defendant. The first defendant had executed a mortgage in respect of the said properties in favour of the second defendant for Rs. 2,320. The first defendant being addicted to bad habits, was prevailed upon to execute a sale deed on 22nd January, 1937, for discharging the mortgage debt and other fictitious considerations recited in the sale. It is also stated that there was no necessity to alienate the entire property as the mortgage debt could have been discharged by selling a one-fourth part of the properties. It is also alleged in the plaint that the plaintiffs were willing to pay their share of the mortgage amount due to the second defendant if the Court found that the shares of the plaintiffs also should pay up the mortgage proportionately. The plaint also discloses that immediately the plaintiffs came to know of the alienation a year back, they called upon defendants 2 and 3 to give back the lands to them. It will therefore be seen that the suit is a simple suit for partition by members of a joint Hindu family and for possession of their shares after electing to treat the said sale as not binding on them.

(3.) The plaintiffs valued the suit under Section 7(v) of the Court-Fees Act at Rs. 62-5-6 and have given the same valuation for purpose of jurisdiction also. The defendants contended in the lower Court that the plaintiffs should have asked for the cancellation of the sale deed and paid court-fees under Section 7(iv-A) of the Court-Fees Act. If that section applied, as the market value of the suit property was beyond the pecuniary jurisdiction of the District Munsiff's Court the plaint should be returned for presentation in the proper Court. The learned District Munsiff rejected this contention relying upon the decision in Ramaswami V/s. Rangachariar