IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 BEFORE THE HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G. PANDIT C.R.P. No.279/2017 BETWEEN:
1. SMT. VENKATALAKSHMAMMA D/O SRI H T GIRIYAPPA W/O SRI REVANNA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS RESIDING AT JYOTHINAGAR MAGADI TOWN RAMANAGARA DISTRICT PIN:562120.
2. SMT. PADMAVATHAMMA D/O SRI S T GIRIYAPPA WIFE OF LATE SRI RANGANATHA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS 3. SMT. NAGARATHNAMMA D/O SRI GIRIYAPPA S.T. AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS 4. SMT. NINGAMMA D/O SRI S T GIRIYAPPA WIFE OF SRI RAJU AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS THE PETITIONERS 2 TO 4 R/AT DOOM LIGHT CIRCLE MAGADI TOWN RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562120. (BY SRI. MOHAN S, ADV.) ...PETITIONERS AND:
SRI S.T.GIRIYAPPA SINCE DEAD DURING THE PENDENCY OF THE SUIT AND HIS LRS ARE ALREADY ON RECORDS THEY ARE THE PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS 2 AND 3 1. SMT. T R LAKSHMAMMA W/O SRI S T GIRIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS 2. SRI THIMMEGOWDA S/O SRI S T GIRIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS THE RESPONDENTS 1 TO 2 RESIDING AT SUBBASHASTRI PALYA MADABAL HOBLI MAGADI TOWN RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562102.
3. SRI. KEMPANNA S/O LATE RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS RESIDING AT THAGGIKUPPE KASABA HOBLI, MAGADI TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT PIN-562120 4. SRI CHANNAPPA S/O LATE PUTTANARASAIAH AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS 5. SRI MUNIYAPPA S/O LATE PUTTANARASAIAH AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS 6. SRI NANJAIAH S/O LATE PUTTANARASAIAH AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS 7. SMT. MUNIRANGAMMA D/O LATE PUTTANARASAIAH AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS 8. SMT. DODDANARASAMMA D/O LATE PUTTANARASAIAH AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS THE RESPONDENTS 4 TO 8 ARE R/AT PARANGICHIKKANA PALYA MADBAL HOBLI, MAGADI TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562120.
9. SRI NAGARAJU S/O THIMMAIAH AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS R/AT SUBBASHASTRY PALYA MADABAL HOBLI MAGADI TALUK RAMANGARA DISTRICT PIN-562120.
10.SMT. INDRANI W/O THIMMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS R/AT SUBBASHASTRY PALYA MADABAL HOBLI MAGADI TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT PIN-562120.
…RESPONDENTS THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 115 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 21.04.2017 PASSED IN OS.NO.251/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MAGADI, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR PARTITION AND SEPARATE POSSESSION.
THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The petitioners/plaintiffs are in revision, under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, assailing the order dated 21.04.2017 passed in O.S.No.251/2008 on the file of Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Magadi, by which the suit is dismissed as not maintainable and to draw the decree accordingly.
2. Against the order of dismissal of suit, revision would not be maintainable. Definition of decree under Section 2(2) of CPC reads as follows :-
Section 2(2) : “decree” means the formal expression of an adjudication which, so far as regards the Court expressing it, conclusively determines the rights of the parties with regard to all or any of the matters in controversy in the suit and may be either preliminary or final. It shall be deemed to include the rejection of a plaint and the determination of any question within section 144, but shall not include – (a) any adjudication from which an appeal lies as an appeal from an order, or (b) any order of dismissal for default.”
A reading of the above definition makes it clear that suit may be decided either preliminary or finally, which would be a decree. In the instant case, the suit is dismissed on the question of maintainability. Against dismissal of the suit, civil revision petition would not be maintainable, in view of proviso to Section 115 of CPC. Hence the revision petition is dismissed with liberty to approach appropriate forum.
Sd/- JUDGE NG* CT:bms