The court fee for a partition suit is determined based on the plaintiff's assertion of joint possession in the plaint. A defendant's claim of exclusive possession in the written statement does not warrant a shift in valuation prior to the trial and adjudication of evidence.

CAV ORDER

This Writ Petition is filed by the petitioners (defendants No.9 to 17) to quash the order dated 30.01.2018 passed in O.S.No.175/2011, on the file of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Devanahalli (‘the trial Court for short).

2. The petitioners herein are the defendants No.9 to 17 before the trial Court and the respondents No.1 to 3 herein are the plaintiffs No.1 to 3 before the trial Court and the respondents No.4 to 8 herein are the defendants No.1 and 8 before the trial Court.

3. For convenience of reference the parties are referred as arrayed before the trial Court.

4. The Brief facts of the case are that:-

The plaintiffs filed suit for partition and separate possession seeking share in the suit schedule properties of their 3/8th share in the plaint schedule properties.

5. It is the case of the plaintiffs that they, along with defendants No.1 to 8, constitute an undivided Hindu Joint Family, being coparceners in joint possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule properties, which are their ancestral joint family properties. The properties originally belonged to one Patel Mare Gowda, S/o Narase Gowda, who purchased the same under a registered sale deed dated 01.08.1952 executed by Muniyappa, S/o Appojappa. Upon such purchase, the said Patel Mare Gowda entered into possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule properties. In pursuance of the same khata and mutation were effected in the name of Patel Mare Gowda. It is stated that there has been no partition of the suit schedule properties till date and that the plaintiffs and defendants No.1 to 8 have equal rights therein, jointly holding 3/4th share only.

6. It is averred that Patel Mare Gowda had two wives, namely Akkayamma and Anjinamma. From the first wife, Akkayamma, he had three children, namely plaintiff No.1-Anjinamma, Krishne Gowda and defendant No.6-M.Narase Gowda. Both Akkayamma and Krishne Gowda are deceased. The said Krishne Gowda died leaving behind his wife Padmanimma and three children, who are arrayed as defendants No.2 to 5. Through his second wife defendant No.1-Anjinamma, Patel Mare Gowda had four children, namely defendant No.7-K.M.Muniraju, defendant No.8-K.M. Ashok Kumar, plaintiff No.2-Vimaladevi and plaintiff No.3-Manjula. Thus, the plaintiffs and defendants No.1 to 8 are co-parceners entitled to joint possession and enjoyment of the suit properties.

7. It is further stated that the defendant No.7 is managing the suit schedule properties on behalf of the joint family. However, he has been colluding with defendants No.1 to 6 and 8 and has been mismanaging the same to the detriment of the plaintiffs’ interest. Due to such acts, the plaintiffs are unwilling to continue in joint possession. They demanded, in the first week of April 2011, an equitable partition of the properties and allotment of their shares by metes and bounds. The defendants, however, refused to effect partition and the panchayats convened in this respect failed. Consequently, the plaintiffs were constrained to institute the present suit seeking partition and separate possession of their legitimate shares.

8. The plaintiffs have also arrayed defendants No.9 to 17 as parties, contending that they are total strangers to the suit schedule properties. On obtaining RTC extracts of the suit schedule properties, the plaintiffs discovered that the names of defendants No.9 to 17 were illegally entered in the revenue records, though no member of the joint family ever executed any deed or document in their favour. It is alleged that defendants No.9 to 17, being powerful persons, managed to get revenue entries fraudulently, but such entries do not confer any right, title or possession as the physical enjoyment continues with the plaintiffs and defendants No.1 to 8.

9. The plaintiffs submit that the following properties are situated at Jodi Yarrappanahalli Village, Kundana Hobli, Devanahalli Taluk:

(a) Sy.Nos.1 to 4 and 28 stand in the name of defendant No.9;

(b) Sy.No.5 in the name of defen