- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29670 RFA No. 242 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 242 OF 2025 (PAR) BETWEEN: SRI. SHIVANNA S/O LATE GANGANNA, AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, R/AT BANAVAR, BELLAVI HOBLI, TUMKURU TALUK, TUMKURU DISTRICT-572107. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. MANU SHANKAR S.S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. SAVITHRAMMA W/O LATE NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/O SS PURAM 16TH CROSS, TUMAKURU-572105. 2. SMT SIDDANANJAMMA D/O LATE GANGANNA, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, R/O KODIHALLI VILLAGE, KORA HOBLI, TUMKURU TALUK, TUMKURU DISTRICT-572107. 3. SMT. SUMANGALAMMA, D/O LATE GANGANNA, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29670 RFA No. 242 of 2025 R/O P. GOLLAHALLI VILLAGE, BELLAVI HOBLI, TUMKURU TALUK, TUMKURU DISTRICT-572107. 4. SMT.SAVITHRAMMA, W/O LATE NANJUNDAPPA, D/O LATE GANGANNA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, R/O CHELUR VILLAGE, CHELLUR HOBLI, TUMAKURU TALUK, TUMKURU DISTRICT-572117 5. SMT. PARVATHAMMA, W/O SHIVANNA, D/O LATE GANGANNA, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, R/O MADENAHALLI VILLAGE, CHELUR HOBLI, TUMAKURU TALUK, TUMKURU DISTRICT-572117. 6. SMT. UMADEVI SINCE DEAD BY LRS, SRI. KANTHARAJU, SINCE DEAD, R6 TO R8 ARE LRS SMT. NALINA K., D/O KANTHARAJU, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, 7. SRI. VIJAYA K.D., S/O KANTHARAJU, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, 8. SRI. SRILAKSHMI K.D., S/O KANTHARAJU, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, THE REPONDENT NOS.6 TO 8 ARE R/AT S.S. PURAM, 16TH CROSS, TUMAKURU-572105. …RESPONDENTS - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29670 RFA No. 242 of 2025 THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 R/W ORDER 41 RULE 1 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 08.11.2024 PASSED IN OS NO.73/2017 ON THE FILE OF II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, TUMAKURU., PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT FOR PARTITION. THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA ORAL JUDGMENT Defendant No.1 is in this appeal assailing the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court in O.S.No.73/2017 dated 08.11.2024 on the file of the II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Tumakuru, whereby, the suit was decreed in part. 2. The suit was valued for Rs.17,20,000/-. The plaintiff sought 1/7th share and for the pecuniary purposes, the plaintiff’s share was valued at Rs.2,45,714/- which is below Rs.10,00,000/-. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that due to inadvertence, a memo was filed in regular appeal before the District Court seeking permission to withdraw - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29670 RFA No. 242 of 2025 the appeal for want of pecuniary jurisdiction, the memo was allowed and appeal was dismissed as not pressed. 4. Under Section 19 (1) of the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964, appeals from decrees and orders of the Civil Judge lie to the District Court when the amount or value of the subject matter of the original suit or proceedings does not exceed Rs.10,00,000/-. As the valuation relevant for the appeal is below Rs.10,00,000/-, the present appeal under Section 96 CPC does not lie before the Court. 5. The appeal is, therefore, disposed of as not maintainable for want of pecuniary jurisdiction. Liberty is reserved to the appellant to present a regular appeal before the District Court having jurisdiction. All contentions are kept open. It is needless to observe that the appellant shall be entitled to seek exclusion of time under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 in accordance with law. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29670 RFA No. 242 of 2025 For statistical purposes, the appeal stands disposed of. sd/- _____________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA MBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 49