( 1 ) THE point raised in the revision petition is whether cross-objection can be preferred in a C. M. A. filed under the Order 43, Rule 1 (a) C. P. C. The lower appellate court held that cross-objections cannot be preferred in such an appeal and rejected the memorandum of cross-objections filed in C. M. A. No. 131 of 1973.

( 2 ) THE learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the cross-objections, a few facts are necessary to be stated. The petitioners are the defendants. The respondents-plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration and injunction against the petitioners-defendants. They valued the suit land at Re. 1 per square yard. The defendants took objection to that valuation in their written statement and stated that the market value of the suit land is Rs. 30 per square yard.

( 3 ) THE trial Court, i. e. , the 2nd Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, framed issue No. 4, viz. , whether the court-fee paid is not sufficient and whether this Court has no pecuniary jurisdiction to try the suit? The trial Court first took up this issue and recorded the evidence and came to the conclusion that the suit property has to be valued at the rate of Rs. 10 per