Dismissed

Ganesh S/O.Bharamappa Shavi v. Hanumantappa S/O. Bharamappa Shavi

Karnataka HC28 Mar 2023WP/145702/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the dismissal of an application to reject a plaint for insufficient court fee. The High Court held that an admission made during cross-examination regarding a higher claim value precluded rejection and dismissed the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed as devoid of merits, and pending interlocutory applications were disposed of.

Ganesh S/O.Bharamappa Shavi Vs Hanumantappa… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 145702 of 2020

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 28^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 145702 OF 2020 (GM-CPC)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

GANESH S/O. BHARAMAPPA SHAVI AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC : TAILOR, R/O. H.NO.705, S.M.KRISHNA NAGAR, BETAGERI, TQ: AND DIST : GADAG.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. S G KADADAKATTI, ADVOCATE) AND:

¶12

HANUMANTAPPA

¶13

S/O. BHARAMAPPA SHAVI AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: WEAVOR R/O. NEAR JALISAB MOSQUE, RAJAJI ROAD, BETAGERI, TQ: AND DIST: GADAG.

¶14

Digitally signed by YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench

¶15

VENKATESH S/O. DODDABHARAMAPPA SHAVI AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: TAILOR, R/O : H.NO.705, S.M.KRISHNA NAGAR, BETAGERI, TQ: AND DIST: GADAG.

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 10-02-2020 PASSED ON I.A.NO. VIII IN O.S.NO.8/2016 ON THE FILE OF IV ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC II GADAG VIDE ANNEXURE-G BY ALLOWING THIS WRIT PETITION IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶18

¶19

WP No. 145702 of 2020

¶20

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The captioned writ petition is filed by the defendant feeling aggrieved by the order of the learned Judge passed on I.A.No.8 filed under Order VII Rule 11(B) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short “CPC”) to reject the plaint as the plaintiff has failed to value the suit for Rs.15,00,000/- as admitted by the plaintiff in cross-examination. The said application is rejected by the learned Judge. Therefore, the defendant is before this Court.

¶23

Rejection of the plaint can be sought for at the earliest point of time. The defendant can seek rejection of plaint if the ingredients of Order VII Rule 11 of CPC are demonstrated. This is a peculiar case where the defendant placing reliance on the admission elicited in the crossexamination of the plaintiff has filed an application to seek rejection of the plaint. Though provision of Order VII Rule 11 of CPC in regard to payment of deficit court fee is mandatory, based on admission during trial, the defendant

¶24

¶25

WP No. 145702 of 2020

¶26

cannot seek rejection of plaint. The learned Judge while rejecting the application has held that it is for the defendant to prove that the value of the suit schedule property is more than Rs.10,00,000/-. The learned Judge has also recorded a finding that valuation submitted by the plaintiff needs to be accepted in the absence of material indicating that the plaintiff has deliberately valued the suit at a lesser amount. The learned Judge has rightly rejected the application holding that based on admission given by the plaintiff during trial, the defendant cannot seek rejection of the plaint. Therefore, I am not inclined to interfere with the order under challenge. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed as devoid of merits.

¶27

In view of disposal of the petition, pending

¶28

interlocutory applications, if any, do not survive for consideration and are disposed of accordingly.

¶29

SD/JUDGE

¶30

YAN, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6

Ganesh S/O.Bharamappa Shavi v. Hanumantappa S/O. Bharamappa Shavi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ganesh S/O.Bharamappa Shavi v. Hanumantappa S/O. Bharamappa Shavi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Raghuveer Enterprises Represented Vs the Deputy Commissioner, Ballari

Smt. Gangawwa W/O Parappa Kadapatti Vs Smt. Jayashree D/O Annappa Kanagond

Chandrashekhar S/O Shiddayya Hiremath Vs Fakkirappa S/O Kariyappa Vaddellappanavar

Sri Harish Vs Sri K N Jayaram

Smt Shaiken Bee and Ors. Vs Smt Gousia Begum and Ors.

Smt.Supriya Vs the State