THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI
Padikkal Kozhisseri Sumangala – Appellant
Versus
Padikkal Kozhisscri Syamala – Respondent
Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.
Defendants 5 to 11 in a suit for partition are the appellants.
2. Plaintiffs sued on the assertion that they and defendants are in joint possession. Hence, they paid court fee under Section 37(2) of Kerala Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1959, for short, 'C.F Act'. The appealing defendants did not claim any share or pay court fee in terms of sub-section (3) of Section 37 of the C.F Act, but pleaded that they are in exclusive possession of a particular parcel out of the suit properties and that the said parcel cannot be subjected to partition. Alternatively, they claimed reservation in case of partition being ordered. Trial court passed a preliminary decree overruling the plea of the appealing defendants as to their exclusive rights. Hence this appeal.
3. The plaintiffs and the non-appealing defendants object to this appeal on the ground that it does not lie to this Court. They state that the plaintiffs had valued their share at Rs. 1,07,128/- and, therefore, that is the value of the subject matter of the suit and hence, in terms of Section 13 of the Kerala Civil Courts Act, 1957, for short, 'C.C Act', the appeal would lie only before the D
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.