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

1965 Supreme(Pat) 29

G.N.PRASAD
Ramkishun Mahton – Appellant
Versus
Nero Devi – Respondent


Judgment

G.N.Prasad, J.

1. The petitioners are the plaintiffs of Title Suit No. 41 of 1962 which they have filed in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Second Court. Monghyr, for partition claiming -/8/- annas share in the suit-properties on the basis of a genealogy which has been included in Schedule 1 of the plaint. The short question which arises for decision is whether the petitioners are liable to pay court-fee on ad valo rem basis upon the plaint which they have filed with a fixed court-lee of Rs. 22.50 under Article 17(vi) of Schedule II of the Court-Fees Act.

2. By his order dated the 31st August 1963, the learned Subordinate Judge has held that although in the relief-portion of the plaint only a simple prayer has been made for partition, the recitals contained in paragraphs 7 to 13 of the plaint make it clear that the plaintiffs are really seeking a declaration to the effect that a compromise decree passed in a previous suit (Title Suit No. 9 of 1961) between the same parties is invalid, void and not binding upon them According to the learned Subordinate Judge, the plaintiffs can get a decree in the present suit only when the decree in the previous suit is set aside and. th









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