Smt. Sanjeevamma vs Sri. Devaraj
2023 Latest Caselaw 5799 Kant

                                                        -1-
                                                                  NC: 2023:KHC:29567
                                                                RFA No. 1326 of 2023




                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                                   DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2023

                                                    BEFORE
                                     THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
                           REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1326 OF 2023 (PA R/DEC/INJ)
                          BETWEEN:
                          1.   SMT. SANJEEVAMMA,
                               W/O SRI MARIYANN
                               AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
                               R/AT NO. 399, MUNIRATHNAMMA BUILDING
                               PIPE LANE ROAD
                               HOYSALANAGARA
                               SUNKADAKATTA
                               BANGALORE - 560 091
                          2.   SMT. VANAJAKSHI M
                               D/O SRI MARIYANNA
                               W/O LATE SIDDALINGAIAH
                               AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
                               R/AT NO.5, 13TH C ROSS
                               HOYSALA NAGARA
                               SUNKADAKATTA
                               BANGALORE - 560 091
                          3.   SRI RAJESH M
                               S/O SRI MARIYANNA
Digitally signed by            AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
BHAVANI BAI G
Location: High Court of
                               R/AT SNEHAJYOTHI ASHRAMA ROAD
Karnataka                      ANCHEPALYA VILLAGE
                               KENGERI HOBLI
                               BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK
                          4.   SMT GEETHA
                               D/O SRI MARIYANNA
                               W/O SRI RAMAKRISHNAPPA
                               AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
                               R/AT 8/1, RANGANATHA NILAYA
                               1ST MAIN ROAD
                               GOVINDARAJA NAGAR
                               BENGALURU - 560 040
                                                                        ...APPELLANTS
                          (BY SRI. B.V. KRISHNAPPA, ADVOCATE)
                              -2-
                                           NC: 2023:KHC:29567
                                        RFA No. 1326 of 2023




AND:

1.   SRI. DEVARAJ,
     S/O LATE BORALINGEGOWDA
     AGED 57 YEARS
     R/AT LAKSHMIPURA VILLAGE
     KUTAGAL HOBLI
     RAMANGARA TALUK AND DISTRICT

2.   SRI MARIYANNA
     S/O LATE HUCCHEGOWDA
     AGED 82 YEARS
     R/AT NO.399
     MUNIRATHNAMMA BUILDING
     PIPE LANE ROAD
     HOYSALANAGAR
     SUNKADAKATTA
     BANGALORE - 560 091

3.   SRI LINGE GOWDA
     S/O LATE HUCCHEGOWDA
     AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS

4.   SMT JAYAMMA
     W/O SRI LINGE GOWDA
     AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS

     RESPONDENTS NO.3 AND 4 ARE
     R/AT LAKSHMIPURA VILLAGE
     KUTAGAL HOBLI
     RAMANAGAR TALUK AND DIST
                                                ...RESPONDENTS

       THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT    AND   DECREE   DATED   13.03.2023   PASSED   IN   OS
No.199/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE
AND CJM, RAMANAGARA, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR PARTITION,
DECLARATION AND INJUNCTION.

       THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                 -3-
                                              NC: 2023:KHC:29567
                                           RFA No. 1326 of 2023




                            JUDGMENT

Office has raised an objection regarding maintainability

as the value of the share of the plaintiff does not exceeds Rs.10

Lakhs.

Learned counsel for the appellants filed memo for

withdrawing the appeal with liberty to the appellants to file an

appeal before the District Judge.

2. Submission of learned counsel is placed on record.

3. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn

with liberty to the appellants to file an appeal before the

District Judge.

4. The appellants are entitled for the benefit under

Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

5. Office to return the documents to the learned

counsel for the appellants.

Sd/-

JUDGE

GBB