IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 09TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR REGULAR FIRST APPEAL No.1773 OF 2018 (PAR) BETWEEN:
1. Smt. Mallamma W/o late Nandishwaraiah, Aged about 57 years, 2. Smt. Manjula W/o Umashankar, Aged about 33 years, R/at Jinnagara Village, Jedigenahalli Hobli, Hosakote Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District – 560 067.
3. Sri. Sathish S/o late Nandishwaraiah, Aged about 29 years, 4. Sri. Shivarudraiah S/o late Shivanna, Aged about 51 years 1, 3 and 4 are R/at Boppanahalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Malur Taluk, Kolar District – 563 130. …Appellants (By Smt. Sukanya H.D., Advocate) AND:
1. Smt. Parvathamma W/o late Veerappa, Aged about 85 years, R/at Shettiganahalli Village, Vakkaleri Hobli, Malur Taluk, Kolar District – 563 130.
2. Smt. Gowramma W/o Nandeeshappa, Aged about 81 years, R/at Boppanahalli Village, Malur Taluk, Kolar District – 563 130.
3. Smt. Puttagowramma W/o Nanjundappa, Aged about 79 years, R/at Jinnagara Village, Jedigenahalli Hobli, Hosakote Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District – 560 067.
4. Smt. Parvathamma W/o late Munirudrappa, Since dead by her LRs 4(a) Smt. Nandishamma Aged about 67 years, 4(b) Smt. Mariyamma Aged about 65 years, Both are children of Smt. Parvathamma, R/at Jinnagara Village, Jedigenahalli Hobli, Hosakote Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District – 560 067.
5. Smt. Baby Since dead by her LRs 5(a) Umashankar S/o late Mallaiah, Aged about 52 years, R/at Jinnagara Village, Jedigenahalli Hobli, Hosakote Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District – 560 067.
5(b) Smt. Shivakumara @ Prema W/o Papanna, Aged about 50 years, R/at Cholagatta Village, Kolar Taluk and District – 517 247.
5(c) Smt. Manjula W/o Ganesh, Aged about 46 years, R/at Cholagatta Village, Nandagudi Hobli, Hosakote Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District – 560 067.
5(d) Smt. Jagadamba W/o Shivanna, Aged about 44 years, R/at Matyagaram Village, Binnamangalam Post, Denkanikote Taluk, Krishnagiri District, Tamil Nadu State – 635 001.
All are children of late Smt. Baby W/o Mallaiah 6. Sri. Mallikarjunaiah S/o Munirudrappa, Aged about 55 years, 7. Smt. Mariyamma D/o Munirudrappa, Aged about 52 years, 8. Sri. Mahadev S/o Munirudrappa, Aged about 49 years, 9. Sri. Shivashankar S/o Munirudrappa, Aged about 47 years, 10. Smt. Prema W/o late Chandrappa, Aged about 48 years, R/at Boppanahalli Village, Malur Taluk, Kolar District – 563 130.
11. Smt. Siddagangamma W/o Muniraju, Aged about 42 years, R/at Doddanallala, Jadigenahalli Hobli, Hosakote Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District – 560 067.
12. Smt. Mareeramma W/o Bageshwaraiah, Aged about 72 years, R/at Hurulugere Village, Kasaba Hobli, Malur Taluk – 563 130.
13. Smt. Rudramma W/o Shirudraiah, Aged about 69 years, R/at Paduvanahalli Village, Masthi Hobli, Malur Taluk – 563 130.
14. Smt. Nanjamma W/o Appajigowda, Aged about 65 years, R/at Chimangala, Jangamakote Hobli, Shidlagatta Taluk, Kolar District – 517 247.
15. Smt. Sujatha W/o Sadashivaiah, Aged about 52 years, R/at Boppanahalli Village, Malur Taluk, Kolar District – 563 130.
16. Sri. Ramachandrappa S/o Thammanna, Aged about 58 years, R/at Boppanahalli Village, Malur Taluk, Kolar District – 563 130. … Respondents (By Sri. Prakash D.N., Advocate for C/R1 to R3) This RFA is filed under Section 96 read with Order XLI Rule 1 of CPC against the judgment and decree dated 31.07.2018 passed in O.S.No.211/2011 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Malur decreeing the suit for partition and separate possession.
This RFA coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER Registry has raised an objection with regard to jurisdiction of the Court to entertain the appeal. The appellants’ counsel submits that according to guidance value issued by the Government, the market value of the property is Rs.18.00 lakhs. Therefore, the appeal is filed in this Court. The said submission of the appellants’ counsel cannot be accepted because the initial valuation shown by the plaintiff decides the appellate forum. In the valuation slip it is stated that market value of the plaintiff’s share is Rs.1,50,000/-. Therefore, this Court has no jurisdiction. The appeal is returned to the appellants to enable them to prefer the appeal in the Court having jurisdiction. Registry is directed to return the appeal memo and certified copy of the impugned judgment. If the appeal is re-presented in the concerned Court within a period of 30 days from today, limitation is saved.
Sd/- JUDGE MBM