Lakshmana Rao, J.

1. The suit is for partition by persons in joint possession and it is common ground that court-fee is payable under Article 17-B of Schedule II of the Court-Fees Act. The dispute is as to the value of the suit for purpose of jurisdiction and as pointed out in Vasireddi Veeramma v. Butchayya (1926) 52 M.L.J. 381 : I.L.R. Mad. 646 in which all the decisions were considered the valuation to be adopted for the purpose of jurisdiction is the actual market value of the property in suit. To the same effect are the decisions in Kattiya Pillai v. Ramaswamia Pillai AIR1929Mad396 , and Karuppanna Nadar v. Karuppa Nadar AIR1939Mad776 , and it is found by the lower Court that the value of the shares of the plaintiffs will be not less than Rs. 10,000. This suit should therefore have been instituted in the Subordinate Judges Court of Rajahmundry and the District Munsif has no jurisdiction to entertain it. The order of the District Munsif is therefore set aside and he is directed to return the plaint for presentation to proper Court. There will be no order as to costs.