KALLIANI AMMA Vs. METATHIL VEETIL ACHUTAN NAIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiffs who are the petitioners sued for a declaration that the consent decree in O.S. No. 442 of 1910 and the Karar dated 30th April 1912 are not valid and also for a declaration that the properties specified in the plaint are tarwad properties. They paid a court-fee stamp of Rs. 10 treating the suit as one for a mere declaration. The Subordinate Judge directed that an ad valorem fee should be paid on Rs. 18,000 the value of the properties as set out in the plaint. The fee payable would be Rs. 715 and the petitioners alleging that they had no property sufficient to pay the ad valorem fee directed to be paid, filed a petition to sue in forma pauperis.

(2.) When the petition came on for disposal the Subordinate Judge held that the suit was barred by limitation and dismissed it. Hence this revision petition.

(3.) The Subordinate Judge was of opinion that though all the plaintiffs were minors at the date of the transaction they seek to impeach; they are barred as there were two adult members who could have sued. It is contended by the petitioners vakil (1) that the order directing payment of ad valorem fees was wrong (2) that the Subordinate Judge was wrong in going beyond the scope of the enquiry in Order 33 of the Code of Civil Procedure and (3) that on the tacts found, the suit will not necessarily be barred.