- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8845 MFA No. 104806 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 104806 OF 2019 (LAC) BETWEEN: SHANKREPPA BASAPPA PUJARI, AGE: 67 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: KOLUR, TQ: BILAGI. … APPELLANT (BY SRI. N.L. BATAKURKI, ADVOCATE) AND: THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, UPPER KRISHNA PROJECT, BILAGI, TQ: BILAGI, DIST: BAGALKOT. … RESPONDENT THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54(1) OF LAND ACQUISITION ACT, PRAYING TO MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 22.06.2006 PASSED IN L.A.C. NO.909/2005 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (DT. DN), BILAGI, AND ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT IS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8845 MFA No. 104806 of 2019 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) The office objection raised at Sl.No.1 is regarding maintainability of appeal. Since the value of subject matter of the appeal is below Rs.10,00,000/-, therefore, office has raised objection at Sl.No.1 regarding maintainability of appeal. 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.” 3. The appeal from the Court of Civil Judge is maintainable before the District Court, when the amount or value of the subject matter of the original suit or - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8845 MFA No. 104806 of 2019 proceeding does not exceed Rs.10,00,000/-. It means when the value of subject matter of the appeal is below Rs.10,00,000/-, the appeal lies before the District Court. Therefore, the present appeal lies before the District Court, because of valuation of subject matter of the present appeal is below Rs.10,00,000/-. 4. Therefore, the office objection raised at Sl.No.1 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. 5. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as not maintainable with the observations as discussed above. Sd/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE RHR/- CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 25