- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3295 RFA No. 200063 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.200063 OF 2025 (PAR/POS) BETWEEN: 1. VILAS S/O VASUDEVRAO KULKARNI, AGED : 73 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE & RETIRED TEACHER, R/O: TADOLA, TQ: ALAND, DIST: KALABURAGI. PRESENTLY RESIDING AT KESAR JAWALAGA, TQ: OMERGA, DIST: OSMANABAD – 585 314. (MAHARASHTRA STATE) 2. HANAMANTRAO S/O VASUDEVRAO KULKARNI, AGED : 58 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE SERVICE, R/O: “KULDEEP”, PARIJAT SOCIETY HADAPSAR, NEAR VITHAL MANDIR, PUNE – 411 044. (MAHARASHTRA STATE). 3. RAJKUMAR S/O VASUDEVRAO KULKARNI, AGED : 48 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, Digitally signed by RAMESH MATHAPATI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3295 RFA No. 200063 of 2025 R/O: TADOLA, TQ: ALAND, DIST: KALABURAGI – 585 314. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI MANVENDRA REDDY, ADVOCATE) AND: SUMANBAI D/O VASUDEVRAO KULKARNI, (W/O KALIDAS RAO JOSHI) AGED : 64 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O: TADOLA, TQ: ALAND, DIST: KALABURAGI. PRESENTLY RESIDING AT VIVEKANANDPURAM, NEAR SUT MILL, LATUR, (MAHARASHTRA STATE)–413512. …RESPONDENT THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 05.12.2024 PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, ALAND, DECREEING THE O.S.NO.8/2016, AND FURTHER DISMISS THE SUIT OF THE PLAINTIFF ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, ALAND, IN O.S.NO.8/2016 AS PRAYED FOR IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3295 RFA No. 200063 of 2025 ORAL JUDGMENT Heard. 2. Sri Manvendra Reddy, learned counsel submits that this first appeal arises out of judgment and decree dated 05.12.2024 passed by Senior Civil Judge at Aland, Kalaburagi District, in O.S.no.8/2016, in which plaintiff had sought relief of partition and separate possession of her 1/5th share in suit schedule properties. Suit was valued under Section 35 of Karnataka Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act and for purposes of jurisdiction, market value was mentioned as Rs.40,00,000/-. And Registry had raised office objection about maintainability of appeal, as value of 1/5th share of plaintiff would be less than Rs.10,00,000/-. 3. Though learned counsel vehemently submitted, total landed properties would be more than 30 Acres and in addition, one house property and therefore, valuation was that of plaintiff’s share only, even though not specifically mentioned and contended this Court would have jurisdiction. 4. Specific words in valuation paragraph are as follows: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3295 RFA No. 200063 of 2025 “4(c). The suit is valued at Rs.40,00,000/- for jurisdiction purpose which is the market value of the suit property.” 5. In view of fact that value of 1/5th share sought by plaintiff would be less than Rs.10,00,000/-, appeal would not be maintainable before this Court. Office objection sustained. Appeal is dismissed as not maintainable. Since it is submitted, proper Court against impugned judgment and decree would be appealable before District Court Kalaburagi, Registry is directed to return appeal memorandum for re-presentation before District Court, Kalaburagi, on or before 09.07.2025. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE NB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14 Ct;Vk