JUDGMENT Tudball, J. - This is a reference by the Taxing Officer. The facts are briefly as follows:--A Hindu widow was in possession of certain zamindari property, to wit Khata Khewat 31, the total area was 17 bighas and 6 biswas, and it was assessed to the revenue of Rs. 19-7-0. She transferred 11 bighas, 11 biswas, out of the 17 bighas, 6 biswas, specifying in the sale-deed the actual plots which she transferred. Two out of throe reversioners have now sued to recover two-thirds of the property, thus alienated. The question arises whether the court fees are to be paid u/s 7, clause v (b). 2. Eleven bighas and 11 biswas are for all practical purposes two-thirds of 17 bighas and 6 biswas. But the lady did not sell a fractional two-thirds share in the whole estate; if she had done so, her transferee would have been the owner of a two-thirds share in each and every plot, and liable to pay two-thirds of the revenue. But as matters stand, it is not possible to say what is the actual revenue on the specified plots now sold. It is impossible to calculate the court fee on five times the Government revenue and therefore the court fee must be calculated u/s 7, clause 5 (d). The land is part of an estate paying revenue, but is not a definite fractional share of such an estate. The court fee is therefore payable on the market-value. 3. I allow one month's time to make good the deficiency. ___________________________________ 1 strictly speaking it is not quite two-thirds. 2 See the ruling--Baija