SRI. BASAPPA v. OF KARNATAKA
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
appeals are allowed by law, lie
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as not maintainable with the observations as discussed above. Sd/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE RKM CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 12
Judgment
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 100274 OF 2025 (PAR/POS) BETWEEN:
SRI. BASAPPA S/O YALLAPPA @ YELLAPPA PUJUAR, AGE: 66 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: MUGALI, TQ: AND DIST: DHARWAD.
SRI. HANAMANTHAPPA S/O YALLAPPA @ YELLAPPA PUJUAR, AGE: 64 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: MUGALI, TQ: AND DIST: DHARWAD. (BY SRI. R.H. ANGADI, ADVOCATE) AND: … APPELLANTS MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH SMT. BASALINGAVVA W/O RAMAPPA KOLI, AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD AND AGRICULTURE, R/O: NAYANAGAR, TQ: BAILHONGAL, DIST: BELAGAVI. (BY SRI. GIRISH S. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE) … RESPONDENT THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 READ WITH ORDER 41 RULE 1 OF CPC., 1908, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 11.04.2025 IN O.S. NO.218/2024 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CIVIL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, DHARWAD. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT IS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8506 RFA No. 100274 of 2025 HC-KAR ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) The office objection is with regard to maintainability of appeal. Since the value of subject matter of the appeal is exactly Rs.10,00,000/-, therefore, office has raised objection regarding maintainability of appeal.
Operative part
2. Section 19 of the Karnataka Civil Code Act, 1964, reads as under:
19. Appeals from [Senior Civil Judge].- Appeals from the decrees and orders passed by a [Senior Civil Judge] in original suits and proceedings of a civil nature, shall when such appeals are allowed by law, lie.- (1) to the District Court, when the amount or value of the subject matter of the original suit or proceeding [does not exceed ten lakh rupees]; (2) to the High Court, in other cases.
The appeal from the Court of Senior Civil Judge is maintainable before the District Court, when the amount or value of the subject matter of the original suit or proceeding does not exceed Rs.10,00,000/-. The question is what is - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8506 RFA No. 100274 of 2025 HC-KAR meaning of exactly the value of subject matter of the appeal is Rs.10,00,000/-. It means when the value of subject matter of the appeal is Rs.10,00,000/-, the appeal lies before the District Court. If exceeds Rs.10,00,000/- then appeal lies in this Court. Therefore, the present appeal lies before the District Court, because of valuation of subject matter of the present appeal is Rs.10,00,000/-.
Therefore, the office objection with regard maintainability is upheld. Liberty is reserved to prefer appeal before the District Court. The time spent before this Court in prosecuting this appeal shall be excluded as per Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as not maintainable with the observations as discussed above. Sd/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE RKM CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 12
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: appeals are allowed by law, lie
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 96; Limitation Act, 1963 — s. 14.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.