Kumar, J

This is a plaintiffs' appeal against the order of the learned single Judge who has directed the trial Court to try and decide issue No.3 relating to the court fee as a preliminary issue.

2. For the purpose of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are referred to in the original suit.

3. The plaintiffs filed O.S. No. 213/2000 on the file of the Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Raichur, for the relief of partition and separate possession of their 1/6'h share in the suit schedule property. They also sought for a decree for refund of 1/6" share in the compensation received by the defendant. The defendant filed his written statement contesting the claim. He contended that the compensation received by him in respect of the land acquired by the State Government was his exclusive property. He specifically pleaded that the valuation of the suit and payment of fixed Court fee under Section 35(2) is wrong, and insufficient. As per the claim, each plaintiff has to pay the required Court Fee under Section 21 of the Karnataka Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act. On the basis of the aforesaid pleadings, the Court below framed as many as 5 issues. The 3rd issue fra