Sri.Shrishail S/O : Basappa ... vs Sri.Balappa S/O: Hanamant ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 10961 Kant

                          -1-




                                 RFA No. 100165 of 2020


IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

         DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JULY, 2022

                        BEFORE
         THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
     REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.100165 OF 2020 (PAR)
BETWEEN:

1.   SRI.SHRISHAIL S/O BASAPPA HULASDAR
     AGE:60 YEARS,
     OCC: AGRICULTURE,
     R/O: RADDERHATTI,
     TALUK: ATHANI,
     DIST: BELAGAVI
     PIN:591304

                                           ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. SHIVARAJ P MUDHOL, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.   SRI.BALAPPA S/O: HANAMANT HULASDAR
     AGE:70 YEARS,
     OCC: AGRICULTURE,
     R/O: RADDERHATTI,
     TALUK: ATHANI,
     DIST: BELAGAVI
     PIN:591304

2.   SRI. BHIMAPPA @ BHIMA S/O: HANAMANT
     HULASDAR
     AGE:68 YEARS,
     OCC: AGRICULTURE,
     R/O: RADDERHATTI,
     TALUK: ATHANI,
     DIST: BELAGAVI PIN:591304
                           -2-




                                 RFA No. 100165 of 2020


3.   SRI. RAMACHANDRA S/O: HANAMANT HULASDAR
     AGE:67 YEARS,
     OCC: AGRICULTURE,
     R/O: RADDERHATTI,
     TALUK: ATHANI,
     DIST: BELAGAVI
     PIN:591304

4.   SRI. GURUBASU S/O: HANAMANT HULASDAR
     AGE:64 YEARS,
     OCC: AGRICULTURE,
     R/O: RADDERHATTI,
     TALUK: ATHANI,
     DIST: BELAGAVI
     PIN:591304

5.   SRI. SIDLIGN S/O: HANAMANT HULASDAR
     AGE:63 YEARS,
     OCC: AGRICULTURE,
     R/O: RADDERHATTI,
     TALUK: ATHANI,
     DIST: BELAGAVI
     PIN:591304

6.   SRI. MURAGEPPA S/O: HANAMANT HULASDAR
     AGE:61 YEARS,
     OCC: AGRICULTURE,
     R/O: RADDERHATTI,
     TALUK: ATHANI,
     DIST: BELAGAVI
     PIN:591304

                                           ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. ANAND BAGEWADI, ADVOCATE)

     RFA FILED UNDER SEC. 96 OF CPC., AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND DECREE DTD.18.01.2020 PASSED IN
O.S.NO.99/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR
                                -3-




                                        RFA No. 100165 of 2020


CIVIL JUDGE, ATHANI, DISMISSING THE SUIT FILED FOR
PARTITION.
    THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                        JUDGMENT

Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted

that the pecuniary jurisdiction, as stated in the valuation slip,

would reveal that the appeal lie before the competent District

Court under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Hence,

he prays leave of the court to withdraw the appeal with liberty

to file appeal before the competent District Court.

2. Accepting the submission made by the learned counsel

for the appellant, appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn in

terms of the submission made above by the learned counsel for

the appellant. It is also made clear that, in the event, if the

appeal is filed within four weeks from today, the competent

court, considering the provisions contained under Section 14 of

the Limitation Act, shall dispense with the period spent by the

appellant before this Court.

Sd/-

JUDGE

LNN