- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:2617 RFA No. 513 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 513 OF 2021 (DEC/INJ-) BETWEEN: K. SHIVAKUMAR S/O LATE K. NANJUNDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, R/O 'A' BLOCK MAIN ROAD, SHARAVATHI NAGARA, SHIVAMOGGA - 577 201. PRESENTLY R/AT 'SHIVA' NO.81, A-BLOCK, III MAIN, SWAMY VIVEKANANDA BADAVANE GOPALA, SHIVAMOGGA - 577 205. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. UMESH MOOLIMANI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. S. V. PRAKASH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. V. RAMACHANDRA S/O VENKATESH SHET, AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, C/O NAVADURGA JEWELLERS, OPPOSITE TO MALIKARJUNA TALKIES, DURGIGUDI, SHIVAMOGGA - 577 201. 2. V. RAMACHANDRAPPA S/O ADIGADI KARIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, R/O RAGA RENUKA KRUPA, A-BLOCK, I MAIN, SHARAVATHINAGARA, SHIVAMOGGA - 577 201. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. HARISH KUMAR M S., ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. S.R.DODAWAD, ADVOCATE FOR R2) Digitally signed by VEDAVATHI A K Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:2617 RFA No. 513 of 2021 THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF THE CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 29.06.2020 PASSED IN O.S.NO.95/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, SHIVAMOGGA, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR DECLARATION AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN ORAL JUDGMENT Learned counsel for the respondent has raised an objection regarding maintainability of the appeal as the market value of the property for purpose of court fee is calculated under Section 24(b) of the Karnataka Court Fee and Suits Valuation Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act') and paid 50% of the market value considered for the purpose of jurisdiction. Therefore, as per the valuation slip filled by the plaintiff, the market value of the property was considered at ₹14,25,000/- and the court fee was payable for ₹7,12,500/- under Section 24(b) of the Act and the court fee paid was ₹46,125/-. Therefore, the market value for filing the appeal is less than Rs.10 lakhs and therefore, the appeal should be filed before the District Court. Hence, prayed for dismissing the appeal. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:2617 RFA No. 513 of 2021 2. Per contra, learned Counsel for the appellant has submitted that for the purpose of court fee, he has valued 50% of the market value of the property considering ₹7,12,500/- whereas the market value is paid at ₹14,25,000/- Therefore, it is contended that for more than ₹10 lakhs, this Court has jurisdiction. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent has relied upon the judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of K. FAIZULLA HAQ KHAN Vs. K. FAZAL MOHAMMAD KHAN AND OTHERS in R.F.A No.100161/2015 (Dec-Inj) dated 08.11.2024 (Dharwad Bench) wherein the Co-ordinate Bench at para-2 has held that since the suit is for declaration and injunction and for partition in the alternative, the valuation for declaration and injunction would be higher valuation and under Section 24(b) of the Act, 50% of the valuation is to be taken into account for the purpose of court fee and jurisdiction. In such an event, the value of the suit property for the purpose of jurisdiction would be less than ₹10,00,000/-. Hence, the appeal lies before the district judge and the appeal has been - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:2617 RFA No. 513 of 2021 remitted back to the trial Court. A similar view was taken by another Co-ordinate Bench in W.P. No.10942/2008 (GM-CPC) decided on dated 01.10.2010 in the case of SUSHEELAMMA S.H. Vs. N. SUSHEELA AND OTHERS. 4. Considering the same, I am of the view that the court fee for the purpose of jurisdiction is ₹7,12,500/-. Therefore, the appeal does not lie before this Court and the appeal lies to the District Court. 5. At this stage, learned counsel for the appellant has requested for return of the appeal memo with liberty to the appellant to file the same before the concerned Court. The submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is placed on record. 6. Office is directed to return the appeal memo to the learned counsel for the appellant for the purpose of filing the same before the concerned court. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:2617 RFA No. 513 of 2021 7. For the statistical purpose, this appeal stands disposed off. 8. Office is directed to return the appeal memo forthwith to the appellant with a direction to present the same within 15 days from the receipt of copy of the appeal memo from this Court. 9. Office is further directed to transmit the court fee paid before this Court to the concerned Court. Sd/- (K.NATARAJAN) JUDGE CS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 75 CT:SK