Smt. Anusuya Yallappa Suralkar vs Smt. Maya W/O Ashok Lad
2025 Latest Caselaw 9904 Kant

Karnataka High Court

Smt. Anusuya Yallappa Suralkar vs Smt. Maya W/O Ashok Lad on 6 November, 2025

                                                  -1-
                                                               NC: 2025:KHC-D:15238
                                                             WP No. 100327 of 2023


                        HC-KAR




                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
                        DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025
                                           BEFORE
                      THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
                        WRIT PETITION NO. 100327 OF 2023 (GM-CPC)

                       BETWEEN:

                       SMT. ANUSUYA YALLAPPA SURALKAR,
                       AGE. 71 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK,
                       R/O. CTS NO.1970, MUNICIPAL NO.371,
                       ANANDWADI, BELAGAVI-590 003.
                                                                       ... PETITIONER
                       (BY SRI. VITTHAL S. TELI, ADVOCATE)

                       AND:

                       1.   SMT. MAYA W/O ASHOK LAD,
                            AGE. 60 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD,
                            R/O. R.C. NAGAR, KRISHNA COLONY,
                            TILAKWADI, BELAGAVI-590 006.

                       2.   NANDAKUMAR NARAYAN HARIDAS,
                            AGE. 68 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS,
Digitally signed by
CHANDRASHEKAR
                            R/O. SWAMY VIVEKANAND COLONY,
LAXMAN
KATTIMANI
Location: HIGH
                            BEHIND ARUN THEATRE, TILAKWADI,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
                            BELAGAVI-590 006.
                                                                    ... RESPONDENTS
                       (BY SRI. SHREEVATSA HEGDE, ADVOCATE)

                            THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
                       227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A
                       WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT QUASHING THE
                       ORDER DATED 05/02/2022 IN O.S. NO.2339/2012 PASSED BY
                       THE II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC-BELAGAVI VIDE
                       ANNEXURE-"D".
                              -2-
                                       NC: 2025:KHC-D:15238
                                     WP No. 100327 of 2023


HC-KAR




     THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:

                      ORAL ORDER

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE)

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

and the learned counsel for the respondents.

2. This petition is filed assailing the order dated

05.02.2022 passed in O.S.No.2339/2012 by the Trial Court

directing the petitioner to pay the Court fee under Section

24(b) of the Karnataka Court Fee and Suits Valuation Act,

1958 (for short, 'Act of 1958').

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit

that the plaintiff has filed a suit for declaration and

injunction and declaration is to the effect that the sale deed

executed by the third party is not binding on the plaintiff.

Thus, he would contend that the plaintiff not being a party

to the suit need not to pay the Court fee under Section

24(b) of the Act of 1958. It is his further submission that

the document in question is executed for ₹3,00,000/- as

NC: 2025:KHC-D:15238

HC-KAR

such, the issue relating to the Court fee does not go the

jurisdiction of the Court as such, the said issue can be

considered at the time of final hearing and not as

preliminary issue.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents vehemently

would oppose the submission and would contend that the

plaintiff's husband has sold the property. Plaintiff did not

have any right over the property when husband sold the

property.

5. Learned counsel for the defendants would

contend that the property was sold in public auction and the

property was the absolute property of the plaintiff's

husband and for all practical purposes, it should be treated

as the property sold by plaintiff's husband and plaintiff is

now seeking a declaration that the sale transaction is not

binding on her and it should be deemed that the plaintiff is

seeking cancellation of the document as she is claiming

right over the property through her husband as such, the

NC: 2025:KHC-D:15238

HC-KAR

Court fee is required to be paid on the value of the

document and Section 24(b) of the Act of 1958 is the

appropriate provision under which the Court fee has to be

paid.

6. This Court has considered the contentions raised

at the Bar and perused the records.

7. In terms of the law laid down by the Full Bench

of this Court in Venkatesh R. Desai V. Pushpa Hosmani

and others1, the issue relating to Court fee can be

considered as a preliminary issue only in case if it affects

the jurisdiction of the Court. Since the issue involved in this

case does not affect the jurisdiction of the Court, as the

value of the document is only ₹3,00,000/-, the issue

relating to the Court fee can be considered at the time of

final disposal of the case.

8. Writ petition is allowed.

9. Impugned order dated 05.02.2022 is set aside.

2018 (4) AKR 818

NC: 2025:KHC-D:15238

HC-KAR

10. Question relating to Court fee is kept open to be

decided while delivering judgment.

11. If the Court finds, Court fee paid is inadequate,

the Court shall direct the party to pay Court fee in the final

judgment as a condition precedent to draw decree.

12. It is made clear that nothing is expressed on the

opinion of the matter.

Sd/-

(ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE

CLK CT:BCK