Judgment.- There are no merits in this Civil Revision Petition. The order of the lower Court regarding the Court-fee due was correct. The plaintiffs-petitioners were not the nearest reversioners when the reversion opened. Their father and fourth defendant were the nearest reversioners each entitled to one half. The suit was dismissed regarding the one half due to their father. The plaintiffspetitioners allege negligence and want their half now, ignoring that dismissal. As they are claiming only through their father, the dismissal of his claim, as abated, has to be set aside before they can re-agitate the claim to that half. They have to pay Court-fee on the market value of that half as on the date of the plaint under section 40 of the new Court-Fees Act. The Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No orders as to costs. P.R.N. ------- Petition dismissed.