JUDGMENT

1. Defendants 3 and 4 in the suit filed the above revision against the order dtd. 30/12/2022 in I.A.No.169 of 2022 in O.S.No.103 of 2016 on the file of I Additional District Judge, Kurnool.

2. Respondents 1 and 2 herein, being plaintiffs filed suit O.S.No.103 of 2016 initially against other respondents seeking partition of plaint schedule property. Pending the suit, revision petitioners came on record as defendants 3 and

3. Revision petitioners are sons of 3rd respondent and grandson of 4th respondent herein. After revision petitioners came on record, they filed I.A.No.169 of 2022 under Order VII Rule 11 (b) and (c) of CPC to direct the plaintiffs to value the suit under Sec. 34 (1) of the Andhra Pradesh Court Fee and Suits Valuation Act, 1956 (for short "CF Act") and direct the plaintiffs to pay deficit Court fee by granting reasonable time and failure to comply with the same, to reject the plaint.

4. In the affidavit filed in support of the petition, it was contended interalia that the claim of plaintiffs in the suit is baseless. There is no property within the boundaries mentioned in the plaint. Plaintiffs were never in possession of property much less joint possession at a