Defendant Nos.3 and 4 have filed the present writ petition against the order dated 30.11.2017 passed on preliminary issues framed on 3.11.2015 answering the additional issue with regard to the Court fee as negative holding that the suit has been properly valued for court fee and jurisdiction.

2. The plaintiffs filed the original suit for partition and separate possession of plaint ‘A’ schedule properties into five equal shares by metes and bounds with reference to good and bad soil and allotment of three such shares to them. The value of the properties was for a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- both for the purpose of court fee and jurisdiction and accordingly, Rs.200/- was paid as court fee under Section 35(2) of the Karnataka Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1958; for declaration that the alleged registered sale deed dated 29.10.2010 alleged to have been executed before the Sub-Registrar Office, Mulki in favour of defendant Nos. 3 and 4 on the strength of alleged General Power of Attorney Deed dated 24.10.2007 is void, illegal and not binding on the plaintiffs; that the plaintiffs father Kittanna Shetty was enjoying the plaint ‘A’ schedule property in his individual capacity on the