- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25838 RFA No. 1566 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1566 OF 2025 (DEC) BETWEEN: 1. NANJUNDA REDDY S/O LATE BHADRAIAH @ BHADRA REDDY AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS 2. VEERABHADRAPPA S/O LATE BHADRAIAH @ BHADRA REDDY AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS BOTH ARE R/AT CHINTHALA MADIVALA VILLAGE HUSKUR POST, SARJAPURA HOBLI ANEKAL TALUK BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT-562106. …APPELLANTS (BY SMT. JYOTHI .S.K, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SUJATHA D/O MUNISWAMY REDDY AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS 2. SRINIVAS REDDY S/O MUNISWAMY REDDY AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS 3. KRISHNA REDDY S/O MUNISWAMY REDDY AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS Digitally signed by NAGARAJA B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25838 RFA No. 1566 of 2025 4. JANGAMA REDDY S/O MUNISWAMY REDDY AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS 5. MUNISWAMY REDDY S/O STATED TO BE LATE JANGAMA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS R1 TO R5 ARE R/AT DOMMASANDRA VILLAGE, SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT-562 125. 6. P.R. SATHYANARAYANA S/O P.M. RAMAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS R/AT NO.440, ELLEMALLAPPA ROAD BANGARPET, KOLAR DISTRICT-563101. ALSO AT NO.40, COMFORT SANNIDI PLOT NO.201, PATELAMMA TEMPLE STREET BASAVANAGUDI, BENGALURU-560004. 7. K. PAPANNA S/O CHIKKAKAKAPPA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/AT NO.126/2, NEAR GOVT HIGH SCHOOL HUSKUR VILLAGE AND POST ANEKAL TALUK BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT-562106. 8. MEKALA RAGHUNATHA REDDY S/O MEKALA THIMMA REDDY AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS R/AT GROUND FLOOR, 1ST MAIN 1ST CROSS, MUTHANALLUR CROSS NEAR SWAMY VIVEKANANDA LAYOUT ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT-562106. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25838 RFA No. 1566 of 2025 9. CHAKKARA BHASKARA S/O CHAKKARA SIDDAIAH AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS R/AT NO.541, FLOOR, 3RD MAIN SBM COLONY, ANAND NAGAR BENGALURU NORTH BENGALURU-560 024. 10. REDDAPPA REDDY S/O B. BHASKAR REDDY AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/AT DIGAVURU, ARIKALAVANDALAPALLI CHINNAGOTTIGALLU, CHITTER ANDHRA PRADESH-517001. …RESPONDENTS THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 07.03.2025 PASSED ON I.A.NO.III IN OS.NO.1248/2024 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ANEKAL, ALLOWING THE I.A.NO.III FILED UNDER ORDER VII RULE 11(a) AND (d) OF CPC FOR REJECTION OF PLAINT. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL JUDGMENT A perusal of the valuation slip indicates that the suit was valued at Rs.10,00,000/- for the purposes of jurisdiction. In view of the said valuation, this Court lacks appellate jurisdiction to entertain the present appeal, and the appellants are required to approach the appropriate - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25838 RFA No. 1566 of 2025 appellate forum, namely, the District Court, for redressal of their grievance. 2. Accordingly, upholding the office objections, the appeal stands disposed of, reserving liberty to the appellants to file an appeal before the competent appellate Court in accordance with law. 3. The Registry is directed to forthwith return the certified copies of the impugned judgment and decree to the appellants, after retaining photocopies for record purposes. If the appellants file the appeal before the appropriate forum within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copies, they shall be entitled to claim the benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE CA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 62