Joint possession plaints for partition attract the court-fee provision for joint possession, with doubt resolved in favour of the lesser fee.

A plaint expressly pleading joint possession and seeking partition and separate possession is governed by the court-fee provision applicable to a suit based on joint possession. Court-fee statutes are to be strictly construed, and any reasonable doubt must be resolved in favour of the litigant claiming the lesser fee. On that basis, the proper fee was payable under Section 37(2), corresponding to Article 17(B) of the Central Act, and the contrary view taken below was set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether the plaint, which alleged joint possession and sought partition and separate possession of a half-share, attracted court-fee under Section 37(2) corresponding to Article 17(B) of the Central Act.

Analysis: The plaint specifically stated that the plaintiff was in joint possession and was seeking partition and separate possession as an heir. In case of doubt, provisions imposing court-fee are to be strictly construed, and the benefit of a reasonable doubt goes in favour of the party claiming payment of the lesser fee. On the pleadings, the claim fell within the provision applicable to a suit based on joint possession.

Conclusion: The proper court-fee was payable under Section 37(2), corresponding to Article 17(B) of the Central Act, and not on the footing adopted by the courts below.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded, the court-fee ruling below was set aside, and the matter was sent back to the trial court for expeditious disposal without any decision on the merits.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a plaint expressly pleads joint possession and seeks partition and separate possession, the court-fee provision applicable to such a claim must be applied, and any reasonable doubt in the construction of a court-fee statute must be resolved in favour of the litigant seeking the lesser fee.

---