SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1974 Supreme(AP) 115

P.RAMACHANDRA RAJU
Subhadramma – Appellant
Versus
Palaksha Reddy – Respondent


RAMACHANDRA RAJU, J.

( 1 ) THIS revision petition is filed by the 2nd defendant against the finding given by the court of Subordinate Judge, Adoni, in O. S. No. 27 of 1972 on application filed by her to try the issue framed in the suit on the question of court-fee. Whether the court fee paid by the plaintiffs is not correct as a preliminary issue, that the court fee already paid by the plaintiffs valuing the suit properties under Section 34 (2) of the Andhra Pradesh Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Court-Fees Act) is proper. The suit was filed for partition of joint family properties by two minor plaintiffs against their paternal grand-father defendant No. 1, paternal grand-mother defendant No. 2 paternal uncle defendant No. 3, the sister of the plaintiffs, defendant No. 4, their mother defendant No. 5 and the widow of the late brother of the plaintiffs, defendant No. 6. The second defendant filed a written statement taking a plea that some of the items of the suit property are her Stridhana properties and she has been in exclusive possession and enjoyment of the same.

( 2 ) SECTION 34 of the Court-Fees Act relates to partition suits. It is p










Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top