Karnataka High Court
Smt. Puttathayamma vs Smt. Shivamma on 20 November, 2024
Author: K.Natarajan
Bench: K.Natarajan
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:47069
RFA No. 674 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 674 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. PUTTATHAYAMMA,
W/O LATE SHIVANANJAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
R/A GUDIGENAHALLI VILLAGE,
KERAGODU HOBLI-571446,
MANDYA TALUK.
2. SMT NIRMALA,
D/O LATE SHVIANANJAPPA,
W/O PRASHIVAMURHTY,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
R/AT MALLIGERE VILLAGE,
DUDDA HOBLI-573118,
MANDYA TALUK.
3. G S ASHOKA,
S/O LATE SHIVANANJAPPA,
Digitally signed
by BHARATHI S AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
R/A JEEGUNDIPATTANA VILLAGE,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF KERAGODU HOBLI,
KARNATAKA MANDYA TALUK-571446.
4. MAHADEVAIAH,
S/O LATE CHIKKADEVAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS,
5. CHANNAPPA,
S/O LATE CHIKKADEVAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS,
6. SHIVASWAMY,
S/O LATE CHIKKADEVAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:47069
RFA No. 674 of 2024
7. YOGESH,
S/O LATE CHIKKADEVAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
8. DEVARAJU,
S/O LATE CHIKKADEVAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
All ARE R/AT
GUDIGENAHALLI VILLAGE,
KERAGODU HOBLI,
MANDYA TALUK-571446.
APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. SRINIVAS V.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. SHIVAMMA,
W/O LATE M D CHANNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS,
2. MANJUNATHA,
S/O LATE MD CHANNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
3. MD MAHADEVAPPA,
S/O DEVAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS,
4. SMT SARVAMANGALA,
W/O MD MAHADEVAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
5. SMT SHIVAMMA,
W/O LATE PUTTSWAMY
@ SHIVANANJAPPA MC,
AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS,
6. SHANKARAPPA,
S/O LATE PUTTSWAMY
@ SHIVANANJAPPA MC
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:47069
RFA No. 674 of 2024
7. MS RAJASHEKARAMURTHY,
S/O LATE PUTTSWAMY
@ SHIVANANJAPPA MC,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
8. SMT BHAGYAMMA MS,
W/O PANCHALINGAIAH M,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
RESPONDENT NO. 1 TO 8
R/A NANJUDNESHWARA NILAYA,
NO.78, KULLEGOWDANAPALYA ROAD,
FOUR WALL CIRCLE,
K GOLLHALLI,
KUMBALAGODU,
BENGALURU-560074.
9. SMT BHADRAMMA,
W/O LATE SHIVANNA,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
10. MS MOHANKUMAR,
S/O LATE SHVIANNA,
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
11. MS RAVIKUMAR,
S/O LATE SHIVANNA,
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
12. MS RAJESHA,
S/O LATE SHIVANNA,
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
13. BASAVARAJU,
S/O LATE CHANNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
RESPONDENTS NO.9 TO 13 ARE R/AT
MACHALLI VILLAGE,
DUDDA HOBLI-571446,
MANDYA TALUK.
14. SMT SHIVAMMA,
D/O LATE DEVAIAH,
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC:47069
RFA No. 674 of 2024
W/O LATE NANJUNDAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 83 YEARS,
R/A THALASASANA VILLAGE,
PANDAVAPURA TALUK-571434.
15. MAHADEVAPPA,
S/O LATE PUTTAMADAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS,
16. MANJUNATH,
S/O MAHADEVAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
RESPONDENT NO.15 TO 16
R/A HULIKEREKOPPALU VILLAGE,
DUDDA HOBLI-571434,
MANDYA TALUK.
17. SMT SOWMYA,
W/O MANJUNATH,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
R/A MACHAHALLI VILLAGE,
DUDDA HOBLI-571434,
MANDYA TALUK AND DISTRICT.
18. SMT BHAVYA,
W/O SATHISH,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
R/A FLAT NO.24,
NISHANTH PRIME APARTMENT,
NEAR KARIMARIYAMMANA TEMPLE,
IMMADIHALLI, WHITE FIELD,
BENGALURU-560066.
19. SMT NAGARATHNAMMA,
W/O GANGADHARA,
D/O LATE MD CHANNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
R/A SHIVAPURA VILLAGE,
NEAR BASAVESHWRA TEMPLE,
KASABA HOBLI-571429,
MANDYA TALUK.
-5-
NC: 2024:KHC:47069
RFA No. 674 of 2024
20. SMT DAKSHAYINI,
W/O SHIVAKUMAR,
D/O MD CHANNAPPA,
R/A T. MALLIGERE VILLAGE,
DUDDA HOBLI-571405,
MANDYA TALUK.
RESPONDENTS
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC,
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 23.01.2024
PASSED IN OS NO. 57/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, MANDYA, DISMISSING THE
SUIT FOR DECLARATION, INJUNCTION AND PARTITION AND
ETC,.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
ORAL JUDGMENT
Office has raised objections regarding maintainability of
the appeal in respect of the value of the suit schedule property.
2. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that in
the Trial Court the value of the suit schedule property is
mentioned as Rs.30,00,000/- and share of the appellants was
Rs.10,00,000/-. Therefore, the High Court do not have
jurisdiction to entertain this appeal.
3. At this stage, learned counsel for the appellants
seeking permission to withdraw the appeal and present the
NC: 2024:KHC:47069
same before the appropriate District Court and also seeks
permission to return the appeal memo in order to file the same
before the District Court.
4. Permission is granted. Office to return the appeal
memo along with the documents in order to file the same
before the District Court.
5. For statistical purpose, the appeal is disposed of.
SD/-
(K.NATARAJAN)
JUDGE
PNV
