Full Judgment Text
- 1 -
NC: 2026:KHC-D:5100
WP No. 104413 of 2024
C/W WP No. 104414 of 2024
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD
TH
DATED THIS THE 7 DAY OF APRIL, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI
WRIT PETITION NO.104413 OF 2024 (GM-CPC)
C/W
WRIT PETITION NO.104414 OF 2024 (GM-CPC)
IN WP No.104413/2024
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. GOURAMMA W/O.
LATE SHRI. SHAMKUMAR HORADI,
AGE. 39 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD,
R/O. SANMATI ROAD, DHARWAD-580001,
TALUK. AND DISTRICT. DHARWAD.
2. KUMARI DANESHWARI
D/O. LATE SHAMKUMAR HORADI,
MAJOR, OCC. STUDENT,
--REST DO---
PETITIONER NO.1 AND 2 ARE
REPRESENTED BY HER GPA HOLDER
SHRI. RAJESH S/O. BASAVARAJ HORADI,
AGE. 40 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS,
R/O. DHARWAD-580001.
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. A.S. PATIL, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by
MOHANKUMAR B
SHELAR
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
- 2 -
NC: 2026:KHC-D:5100
WP No. 104413 of 2024
C/W WP No. 104414 of 2024
HC-KAR
AND:
1. SHRI. VEERANNA S/O. SHANTAPPA HORADI,
AGE. 67 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS,
R/O. ADAKI ONI, DHARWAD-580001,
TALUK. AND DISTRICT. DHARWAD.
2. SHRI. NEELKANTHA S/O. SHANTAPPA HORADI,
AGE. 57 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS AND PRIVATE JOB,
---REST DO---
3. SMT. SHAKUNTALA D/O. SHANTAPPA HORADI
@ SMT. SAREETA W/O. PRAVEEN MISHRIKOTI,
AGE. 61 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD,
R/O C/O V S HORADI,
---REST DO----
4. SMT. LEELAVATI D/O. SHANTAPPA HORADI
@ SMT. C R LEELAVATI
AGE. 59 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD,
---REST DO-----
5. SMT. PRABHAVATI D/O SHANTAPPA HORADI
@ SMT. M.S. PRABHAVATI,
AGE. 55 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD,
---- REST DO ----
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. S.R. HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2;
NOTICE TO R3 TO R5 ARE SERVED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO I.
ISSUE WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER ORDER OR
DIRECTION, QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED
10.07.2024 PASSED IN REGULAR APPEAL IN RA NO.63/2023
RD
BY THE III DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DHARWAD AS
PER ANNEXURE-N. II. ISSUE ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT,
ORDER OR DIRECTION WHICH DEEMS FIT TO GRANT BY THIS
HON’BLE COURT UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF
THE CASE AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
- 3 -
NC: 2026:KHC-D:5100
WP No. 104413 of 2024
C/W WP No. 104414 of 2024
HC-KAR
IN WP NO.104414/2024
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. GOURAMMA W/O.
LATE SHRI. SHAMKUMAR HORADI,
AGE. 39 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD,
R/O. SANMATI ROAD, DHARWAD-580001,
TALUK AND DISTRICT. DHARWAD.
2. KUMARI DANESHWARI
D/O. LATE SHAMKUMAR HORADI,
MAJOR, OCC. STUDENT,
--REST DO—
PETITIONER NO.1 AND 2 ARE
REPRESENTED BY HER GPA HOLDER,
SHRI. RAJESH S/O. BASAVARAJ HORADI,
AGE. 40 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS,
R/O. DHARWAD-580001.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. A.S. PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SHRI. VEERANNA S/O. SHANTAPPA HORADI,
AGE. 67 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS,
R/O. ADAKI ONI, DHARWAD-580001,
TALUK AND DISTRICT. DHARWAD.
2. SHRI. NEELKANTHA S/O. SHANTAPPA HORADI,
AGE. 57 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS AND PRIVATE JOB,
---REST DO---
3. SMT. SHAKUNTALA D/O. SHANTAPPA HORADI
@ SMT. SAREETA W/O. PRAVEEN MISHRIKOTI,
AGE. 61 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD,
R/O C/O V S HORADI,
- 4 -
NC: 2026:KHC-D:5100
WP No. 104413 of 2024
C/W WP No. 104414 of 2024
HC-KAR
---REST DO----
4. SMT. LEELAVATI D/O. SHANTAPPA HORADI
@ SMT. C.R. LEELAVATI,
AGE. 59 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD,
---REST DO-----
5. SMT. PRABHAVATI D/O. SHANTAPPA HORADI
@ SMT. M.S. PRABHAVATI,
AGE. 55 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD,
--- REST DO---
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. S.R. HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2;
NOTICE TO R3 TO R5 ARE SERVED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO I.
ISSUE WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER ORDER OR
DIRECTION, QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED
10.07.2024 PASSED IN REGULAR APPEAL IN RA
RD
NO.64/2023 BY THE III DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
DHARWAD AS PER ANNEXURE-P. II. ISSUE ANY OTHER
APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION WHICH DEEMS
FIT TO GRANT BY THIS HON’BLE COURT UNDER THE FACTS
AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN THE INTEREST
OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
- 5 -
NC: 2026:KHC-D:5100
WP No. 104413 of 2024
C/W WP No. 104414 of 2024
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI)
The petitioners aggrieved by the impugned orders
dated 10.07.2024 passed in R.A.Nos.63/2024 and
64/2023 respectively by the learned III District and
Sessions Judge, Dharwad vide Annexures N and P
respectively, filed these writ petitions.
2. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of these
petitions are as follows:
The respondents filed a suit in O.S.No.310/2016 on
the file of the learned I Additional Senior Civil Judge and
CJM, Dharwad seeking a relief of possession. The said suit
was decreed vide judgment dated 01.08.2023 and the
counter claim filed by the petitioners came to be
dismissed. The petitioners, aggrieved by the dismissal of
counter claim, and decretal of the suit preferred an appeal
in R.A.Nos. 63/2023 and 64/2023. The respondents raised
objections and filed a memo stating that the appeals filed
- 6 -
NC: 2026:KHC-D:5100
WP No. 104413 of 2024
C/W WP No. 104414 of 2024
HC-KAR
by the appellants are not maintainable before this Court
since the valuation of the subject matter involved in the
appeals exceeds the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Court.
The First Appellate Court, by order dated 10.07.20242023,
allowed the memos’ and held that the First Appellate Court
has no pecuniary jurisdiction to try/entertain these
appeals and directed the office to return the memorandum
of appeals to the petitioners for presentation before the
proper Jurisdictional Court having the pecuniary
jurisdiction to try these appeals. The petitioners, aggrieved
by the order on memos’ dated 25.09.2023, filed these writ
petitions.
3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for
the petitioners, and learned counsel for respondent Nos.1
and 2.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the appeals preferred before the First Appellate Court are
pertaining to the suit property and as the valuation in
- 7 -
NC: 2026:KHC-D:5100
WP No. 104413 of 2024
C/W WP No. 104414 of 2024
HC-KAR
regarding the said property was valued at Rs.8,38,118/-,
the appeals were rightly preferred before the District
Judge. He submits that the First Appellate Court
committed an error in recording its finding that the value
of the subject matter of the suit property exceeds the
pecuniary jurisdiction of the First Appellate Court. He
submits that the First Appellate Court has committed an
error in returning the appeal memos’. Hence, on these
grounds, he prays to allow these writ petitions.
Per contra
5. , learned counsel for respondent
Nos.1 and 2 supports the impugned order.
6. Perused the records and considered the
submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners.
7. It is an undisputed fact that the respondents have
filed a suit in O.S.No.310/2016 on the file of the learned I
Additional Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Dharwad seeking
the relief of possession of the suit property. The said suit
was decreed vide judgment dated 01.08.2023. The
- 8 -
NC: 2026:KHC-D:5100
WP No. 104413 of 2024
C/W WP No. 104414 of 2024
HC-KAR
petitioners have sought for a counter claim, which was
dismissed vide judgment dated 01.08.2023. The
petitioners, aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed
in O.S.No.310/2016, preferred appeals in
R.A.Nos.63/2023 and 64/2023, wherein the petitioners
have valued the appeals for the purpose of jurisdiction of
the First Appellate Court less than Rs.10,00,000/-.
8. From the perusal of the plaint, it is clearly
discloses that the value of the subject matter of the suit is
more than Rs.24,00,000/-. The trial Court passed an order
on 13.07.2018 in O.S.No.310/2016, wherein the total
value of the suit property is Rs.10,17,118/- and
accordingly, directed the respondents to pay the Court
fee of Rs.63,067/-. The order dated 13.07.2018
passed in O.S.No.310/2016 has attained the finality.
The order dated 13.07.2018 clearly discloses that
the value of the property is more than
Rs.10,00,000/-.
- 9 -
NC: 2026:KHC-D:5100
WP No. 104413 of 2024
C/W WP No. 104414 of 2024
HC-KAR
9. As per Section 19(2) of the Karnataka Civil Courts
Act, 1964, if the subject matter of the suit exceeds
Rs.10,00,000/-, then the appeal lies to the High Court.
Admittedly, the petitioners have filed appeal before the
District Judge in R.A.Nos.63/2023 and 64/2023. The First
Appellate Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the
appeals. As the value of the subject matter exceeds the
pecuniary jurisdiction, the First Appellate Court has rightly
passed the impugned orders holding that the District Court
has no pecuniary jurisdiction to try and entertain these
appeals, and has rightly directed to return the
memorandum of appeals for the presentation to the
proper Court having jurisdiction try these appeals.
10. The primary remedy available to the petitioners is
to re-present it before the proper Jurisdictional Court,
accompanied by an application explaining the time spent,
often, under Section 14 of the Limitation Act to condone
the delay. In view of the above discussion, I do not find
any grounds to entertain these writ petitions.
- 10 -
NC: 2026:KHC-D:5100
WP No. 104413 of 2024
C/W WP No. 104414 of 2024
HC-KAR
11. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
dismissed.
1) The writ petition is
2) Pending application/s, if any, stand disposed of.
Sd/-
(ASHOK S. KINAGI)
JUDGE
SSB
CT: UMD