Mr. Mohammed Hariss Vs M/S Assa Real Estate Private Limited — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Mr. Mohammed Hariss Vs M/S Assa Real Estate Private Limited — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal dismissed as not maintainable; liberty reserved to the appellant to file the appeal before the appropriate Court having jurisdiction, which is to adjudicate on merits; time spent before this Court excluded for limitation under Section 14, Limitation Act, 1963; District Court, Chikkamagaluru directed to consider M.A.No.39/2025; pending I.A.s disposed of; Registry to return all original copies to the appellant/counsel.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Miscellaneous First Appeal is maintainable before the High Court of Karnataka, given that the value of the underlying suit is less than Rs. 10,00,000/-. +1 more

Court's answer

The appeal is dismissed as not maintainable before this Court: the value of the suit is Rs.7,00,000/-, which is below the monetary jurisdictional limit applicable to appeals before the High Court under Section 19(1) of the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964.

Ratio / Principle

Liberty is reserved to the appellant to file the appeal before the appropriate Courts of law having jurisdiction, and such Court shall adjudicate the matter in accordance with law on its merits.

Key takeaways

Since the appellant has already filed M.A.No.39/2025 before the District Court, Chikkamagaluru, that Court is directed to consider the appeal and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law.ratio¶54
In view of the dismissal of the appeal, pending I.A.s, if any, do not survive for consideration and are disposed of accordingly.ratio¶58
The time spent for prosecuting the appeal before this Court is excluded for the purpose of limitation as per Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

MFA No. 7968 of 2025 (CPC), filed under Order 43 Rule 1(r) CPC against the order dated 22.09.2025 of the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Mudigere on I.A.Nos.1, 2 and 6 in O.S.No.11/2025 (I.A.Nos.1 and 2 under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC dismissed; I.A.No.6 under Order XXXIX Rule 4 CPC allowed). On the office objection regarding maintainability, the appeal was dismissed as not maintainable: the suit is valued at Rs.7,00,000/-, below the Rs.10,00,000/- monetary jurisdictional limit for appeals to the High Court under Section 19(1) of the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964. Liberty was reserved to the appellant to seek relief before the appropriate Court, which is to adjudicate on merits; the District Court, Chikkamagaluru was directed to consider the already-pending M.A.No.39/2025; time spent before this Court was excluded for limitation under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963; pending applications were disposed of; and the Registry was directed to return the original copies. No precedents were cited; the merits of the injunction dispute were not examined.

1 - NC: 2025:KHC:43650 MFA No. 7968 of 2025

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31^ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 7968 OF 2025 (CPC)

BETWEEN:

MR. MOHAMMED HARISS S/O MOHAMMED SADIQ SIDDIQ AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/AT ROYAL BENS WOOD NO. 90, NAGENAHALLI CROSS BUS STOP, KANNUR POST BAGALUR, BANGALORE 562 149

…APPELLANT

(BY SRI. ALLAH BAKASH M., ADVOCATE)

Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka

AND:

M/S ASSA REAL ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED

REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTIOR MR. SUNDAR, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS RESIDENTIAL AT NO. 18, 1^ST FLOOR 7^TH MAIN ROAD, HRBR LAYOUT KALYANANAGARA BANGALORE-560 043

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:43650 MFA No. 7968 of 2025

HC-KAR

M/S. KALASA ESTATE

A PARTNERSHIP FIRM OFFICE AT KALASA ESTATE, KALASA TALUK CHIKKAMANGALUR DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNERS MR. ALAGHU VAIRAM MR. S. SIVASUBRAMANIYA

MR. ALAGHU VAIRAM S/O S O S SOCKALINGAM AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS R/ AT, NO. S 13, 2^ND FLOOR THE AFFAIRS, PLOT NO.9 SECTOR 17, PLAM BEACH SANPADA NAVI MUMBAI 400 705

MR. S. SIVASUBRAMANIYA S/O.S.O.S SOCKALINGAM AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS RESIDENTAILLL AT, NO. S 13

2^ND FLOOR, SECTOR 17 PALM BEACH, THE AFFAIRS PLOT NO.9, SANPADA NAVI MUMBAI 400 705

M/S CARDIER FOODS AND BEVERAGES PRIVATE LIMITED (CFBL) REPRESENTED BY

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:43650 MFA No. 7968 of 2025

HC-KAR

MR. PURUSHOTTAM YEWALE (CFO) OFFICE AT NO. 216 D B S HERITAGE HOUSE PRESCOTT ROAD, FORT MUMBAI 400 001

MR. SRINIVASAN RAAMCHANDRAN S/O. G. RAMACHANDRAN AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS RESIDENTIAL AT NO.7/10 DHANALAKSHMI NAGAR S N PALAYAM COIMBATORE – 641 031

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR

SANCTUM TRADING CORPORATION CORPORATION OFFICE AT NO.240

DR.D.N.ROAD, FORT, MUMBAI-400 001

KAPIL RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED CIN U92419TG2021PTC147433 OFFICE AT 15^TH FLOOR KAPIL TOWERS NANAKRAMGUDA HYDERBAD, TELANGANA

INDIA – 500 018

MR.VAMANRAO KASUGANTI KALASA COFFEE AND SPICES PVT LTD

NC: 2025:KHC:43650 MFA No. 7968 of 2025

4 -

HC-KAR

CIN U1272TS2023PTC179807

OFFICE AT 15^TH FLOOR KAPIL TOWERS, GACHIBOWLI K.V. RANGAREDDY SERI LINGAMPALLY

TELANGANA, INDIA 500 032

SARAVANGA SUNDARI LLP

OFFICE AT S.NO 144

NANAKRAMGUDA GACHIBOWLI SERI LINGAMPALLY HYDERABAD TELANGANA 500 032 …RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT.KAVITHA DAMODHARAN, ADVOCATE

FOR C/R2 TO R4 AND R8 AND R10 IN CP 21055/2025)

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER OORDER 43 RULE 1(r) OF THE CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DT. 22.09.2025 PASSED ON I.A.NO. 1 AND 2, 6 IN O.S.NO. 11/2025 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MUDIGERE, DISMISSING THE IA NO. 1 AND 2 FILED U/O.39 RULE 1 AND 2 OF CPC AND ALLOWING THE I.A.NO 6 FILED UNDER ORDER XXXIX RULE 4 OF CPC.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

5 -

NC: 2025:KHC:43650 MFA No. 7968 of 2025

HC-KAR

ORAL JUDGMENT

The office has raised an objection regarding maintainability of the appeal against the order passed by the Court of learned Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Mudigere in O.S.No.11/2025 dated 22.09.2025, since the value of the suit is less then 10,00,000/-.

The value of the suit is made of Rs.7,00,000/-. Therefore, the appeal is not maintainable before this Court as per Section 19(1) of the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964. Hence, the appeal is dismissed as not maintainable before this Court.

However, liberty is reserved to the appellant to file appeal before the appropriate Courts of law having jurisdiction. If such appeal is filed before the appropriate Courts, the said Court shall adjudicate the matter in accordance with law on its merits.

It is submitted that the appellant has filed miscellaneous appeal in M.A.No.39/2025 before the District Court, Chikkamagaluru. Therefore, the said Court is directed to

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:43650 MFA No. 7968 of 2025

HC-KAR

consider the appeal and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law.

In view of dismissal of the appeal, pending I.A's if any, do not survive for consideration. Accordingly, the same are disposed of.

The time spent for prosecuting the appeal before this Court is excluded for the purpose of limitation as per Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

Registry is directed to return all the original copies to the appellant/counsel for the appellant.

SD/(HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE

JS

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5