- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20422 RFA No. 1341 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1341 OF 2025 (PAR) BETWEEN: SRI RAMACHANDREGOWDA @ RAMACHANDRA .N S/O A.H.NARASIMHAIAH AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS R/AT NO.83, SAMUDRA NILAYA SRINIVASA REDDY LAYOUT, AVALAHALLI ANJANIPURA, BENGALURU SOUTH - 560 062 (WRONGLY SHOWN RESIDENCE BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT AS AT FARM HOUSE, NEAR JAKKASANDRA JAKKASANDRA VILLAGE, MARALAWADI HOBLI KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT) …APPELLANT (BY SRI. H.N. VENKATESHA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. RAJU S/O LATE MARIYANNA @ MARIGOWDA AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS R/AT LIBRARY ROAD THALAGATTAPURA, UTTARAHALLI HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT PIN-560061. 2. SMT. JAYAMMA W/O MARIYANNA Digitally signed by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20422 RFA No. 1341 of 2025 @ MARIGOWDA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS 3. SRI NATARAJU .M S/O LATE MARIYANNA @ MARIGOWDA AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS BOTH ARE R/AT JAKKASANDRA VILLAGE MARALAWADI HOBLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562121. 4. SMT. SHIVAMMA W/O BOREGOWDA D/O LATE MARIYANNA @ MARIGOWDA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/AT YEDUVANAHALLI VILLAGE HAROHALLI HOBLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK RAMANAGAR-562112. 5. SRI. KUMARA S/O LATE MARIYANNA @ MARIGOWDA AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS R/AT LIBRARY ROAD, THALAGHATTAPURA UTTARAHALLI HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK PIN-560061. 6. SMT. SHOBHA W/O MARAIAH D/O LATE MARIYANNA @ MARIGOWDA AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS R/AT GARALAPURA VILLAGE KODIHALLI HOBLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK RAMANAGAR DISTRICT PIN-562119. …RESPONDENTS THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 26.06.2023 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20422 RFA No. 1341 of 2025 PASSED IN OS.NO.258/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KANAKAPURA, DECREEING THE SUIT FOR PARTITION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL JUDGMENT The office has raised objection regarding maintainability of the appeal. 2. The valuation slip furnished by the plaintiff clearly reveals that 1/5th share of the plaintiff is valued at Rs.7,86,300/- for the purpose of pecuniary jurisdiction. Therefore, appeal would lie before the District Court under Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code. 3. The office objection in regard to maintainability is upheld. The appeal is dismissed as not maintainable. Liberty is reserved to the appellant to approach the Competent Appellate Court to avail remedy under Section 96 of Civil Procedure Code. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20422 RFA No. 1341 of 2025 In the event the appeal is filed within a period of two weeks, the time spent before this Court shall be excluded by extending the benefit under Section 14 of the Limitation Act. Registry is directed to return all the certified copies forthwith after securing photocopies of the same. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE NBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 44