IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.348 OF 2017 BETWEEN 1. Smt. Susheela C.B., W/o. Late B.S.Parameshwara, Aged about 48 years.
2. Sri. B.P.Naveen Kumar, S/o. Late B.S.Parameshwara, Aged about 26 years, Petitioner 2 is unsound mind Hence he is represented by Mother natural guardian Petitioner 1 Smt. Susheela C.B., Both are residing at Gopal Main Road, Near Padma Talkies, Shivamogga-577201.
(By Sri. Siddappa B.M., Advocate) AND 1. Sri. Gangadhara, S/o. Late B.M.Shankara Aradya, Aged about 62 years, Residing at No.5, Saptagiri Nilaya, 7th Cross, 1st Main, Amarajyothi Nagara, Vijayanagar, Bengaluru-560040.
…Petitioners 2. Sri. B.S.Manjunatha, S/o. Late B.M.Shankara Aradya, Aged about 57 years, Arecanut Merchant Halepete, Biruru, Chikkamagalur District-577101.
3. Sri. B.S.Swamy, S/o. Late B.Shankara Aradya, Aged about 55 years, Arecanut Merchant Halepete, Biruru, Chikkamagalur District-577101.
4. Sri. B.S.Panchakshari, S/o. Late B.M.Shankara Aradya Aged about 51 years, Employee of SBI Branch, APMC Yard, Shivamogga-577201.
5. Sri. B.G.Anilshankar, S/o. B.S.Gangadhara, Aged about 30 years, Residing at No.5, “Saptagiri Nilaya” 7th Cross, 1st Main, Amarajyothi Nagara, Vijayanagar, Bengaluru-560040.
6. Smt. Sujatha, C/o. Ankaiah, Age: Major, Residing at Near Malbar Tyres, B.H.Road, Kadur, Chikkamagalur District-577101.
7. Smt. Veena B.S., C/o. G.R.Sreenivasa, D/o. B.S.Sannathimmappa, Maszid Road, Skraipattna, Kadur, Chikkamagalur District-577101.
…Respondents (By Sri. G.R. Sreenivas, Advocate, for R1 to R5 Sri. M.Basavaraj, Advocate for R6 & R7) This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115 of CPC against the order dated 30.06.2016 passed in O.S.No.23/2013 on the file of I Additional Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Shivamogga, allowing the application filed under Section 11 of Karnataka Court Fee and Suit Valuation Act.
This Civil Revision Petition coming on for orders, this day, the Court made the following :
ORDER Heard the counsel for the petitioners and the counsel for respondents 1 to 5. There is a delay of 326 days in filing the appeal and therefore I.A.1/2017 under section 5 of the Limitation Act is filed.
2. The petitioner has assailed the order dated 30.6.2016 passed by the trial court directing the petitioner to value the plaint under section 35 (1) of the Karnataka Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act and to pay court fee computed on the market value of their 1/5th share in the suit property. The petitioners are the legal representatives of the original plaintiff B.S.Parameshwara. This order is revisable, but the learned counsel for the respondents 1 to 5 brings to my notice that on 15.11.2016, the trial court exercised its power under Order VII Rule 11 (b) of CPC and rejected the plaint because the plaintiffs failed to pay the market value of the property. Since the plaint now stands rejected, this CRP does not survive for consideration.
3. Rejection of plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC amounts to a decree and therefore the petitioners can prefer an appeal in which the order impugned here can also be questioned. For these reasons, the CRP does not survive. Hence, it is dismissed reserving liberty to the petitioners to file an appeal.
Sd/- JUDGE Ckl