Venkataramana Rao, J.

1. This revision petition raises a question of court-fee. A few facts may be necessary for the disposal of the same. Defendant 1s grandfather was entitled as reversioner of one Cinni Errayya to certain properties and he filed a suit for recovery of the same as reversioner.

2. All the properties which appertain to the estate of Cinni Errayya are described in Schedule A to the plaint in this action. While the litigation was pending, defendant 2 in this suit who was financing the plaintiff in the said litigation in consideration of the advances made by him obtained a transfer of two-third share in all the properties which defendant 1s family would obtain as a result of the said litigation. Defendant 1s grandfather succeeded in the suit and an appeal was preferred against the said decision to this High Court. While the appeal was pending, a certain arrangement took place on 26th January 1927 between the plaintiff and the father of defendant 1 who had succeeded to the estate by virtue of his fathers death. The arrangement was this: Both the plaintiff and the father of defendant 1 should buy out defendant 2 by paying Rs. 7,500 and get a transfer of the two-third