IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT WRIT PETITION NO.17811 OF 2019 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN:
VASANTHAMMA W/O. BASAVARAJU B. AGED 51 YEARS R/AT NO.85, 3RD MAIN MUNESHWARA BLOCK MAHALAKSHMI PURAM BANGALORE 86 ... PETITIONER (BY SRI PRAMOD .R, ADVOCATE) AND:
BABULAL SEERVI S/O. TIAM RANJI AGED 33 YEARS R/O. MARUTHI COMPLEX MARUTHINAGARA ARASHINAKUNTE VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK ... RESPONDENT THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 22.09.2018 (ANNEXURE-C) PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE, NELAMANGALA IN OS.NO.196/2018 AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The petitioner being the plaintiff in a suit for declaration and possession in O.S.No.196/2018 is invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court for assailing the order dated 22.09.2018, a copy whereof is at Annexure – C, whereby the learned Civil Judge, Nelamangala, has treated the issue relating to suit valuation and court fee as a preliminary issue.
2. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused the petition papers, the impugned order cannot be faltered since it is impugned with sub Section 2 of Section 11 of the Karnataka Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1958 as interpreted by the full bench decision of this Court in the case of VENKATESH R DESAI VS. SMT.PUSHPA HOSMANI AND OTHERS, ILR 2018 KAR 5095, wherein para no.35, which reads as under:
“35.Accordingly, and in view of the above, we are clearly of the view that by virtue of Section 11 of the Karnataka Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1958 read with Order XIV Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, when an issue of valuation and/or court fee is raised in a civil suit on the objection of the defendant, the same is not invariably required to be tried as a preliminary issue and before taking evidence on other issues;
but could be tried as a preliminary issue if it relates to the jurisdiction and the Trial Court is of the view that the suit or any part thereof could be disposed of on its determination. The reference stands answered accordingly.”
The above observations leave a lot of discretion with the trial Court to decide the matter either way and such discretionary orders are not susceptible to deeper scrutiny by the Writ Court exercising a limited supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India vide SADHANA LODH VS. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, (2003) 3 SCC 524.
In the above circumstances, the writ petition being devoid of merits disposed off without indulgence.
Sd/- JUDGE KTY