Sri Doddanna Vs Union of India — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Sri Doddanna Vs Union of India — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal dismissed as not maintainable and rejected; liberty reserved to the appellant to file an appropriate appeal before the appropriate Court; time consumed in pursuing this appeal to be deducted while computing limitation; certified copy of the impugned judgment and decree and the additional documents filed with the IA to be returned after retaining photocopies.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Regular First Appeal under Section 100 CPC is maintainable before the High Court, given the Office objection that the value of the suit property does not exceed Rs.10,00,000/- (so that the appeal lies before the District Court), which objection the learned counsel for the appellant did not dispute.

Court's answer

The appeal is not maintainable before the High Court because the value of the suit property does not exceed Rs.10,00,000/-; consequently the appeal is to be filed before the District Court, and the learned counsel for the appellant did not dispute this.

Ratio / Principle

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as not maintainable before this Court and is rejected, with liberty reserved to the appellant to file an appropriate appeal before the appropriate Court.

Key takeaways

The time consumed in pursuing this appeal shall be deducted while considering the limitation applicable to an appeal before the appropriate Court.ratio¶¶76
Office is directed to return the certified copy of the impugned judgment and decree after retaining a photocopy, and the documents filed by the appellant along with the IA for production of additional documents shall be returned to the appellant after retaining photocopies.obiter¶¶76

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Regular First Appeal No. 584 of 2026 (DEC) under Section 100 CPC against the judgment and decree dated 20.01.2026 passed by the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, in O.S.No.604/2002, dismissing a suit for declaration. Held, dismissing the appeal as not maintainable: the Office raised an objection that the value of the suit property does not exceed Rs.10,00,000/-, so the appeal is to be filed before the District Court, and the learned counsel for the appellant did not dispute this. The appeal was accordingly rejected, with liberty reserved to the appellant to file an appropriate appeal before the appropriate Court; the time consumed in pursuing this appeal is to be deducted while considering limitation; the certified copy of the impugned judgment and decree, and the additional documents filed with the IA, are to be returned after retaining photocopies. Oral judgment of Hon'ble Mr. Justice R. Nataraj, dated 17.04.2026.

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:21095 RFA No. 584 of 2026

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 584 OF 2026 (DEC)

BETWEEN:

SRI DODDANNA

SINCE THE ORIGINAL PLAINTIFF DIED THE LEGAL HEIRS BROUGHT ON RECORD BEFORE THE TRAIL COURT.

SRI D. KEMPANNA S/O LATE DODDANNA, LR NO. PLAINTIFF NO.1(A) SINCE DIED ON 10/09/2022 DURING PENDENCY OF SUIT BY HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES

SMT. RATHNAMMA W/O LATE D.KEMPANNA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS.

Digitally signed by HEMALATHA J Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

SMT.KANTHAMMA D/O LATE D.KEMPANNA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS

SMT. SAVITHA D/O LATE D.KEMPANNA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,

SRI. AMBARISHA S/O LATE D.KEMPANNA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT THIRUMALENAHALLI VILLAGE, BIDARAHALLI HOBLI, - BANGALORE EAST TALUK,

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:21095 RFA No. 584 of 2026

HC-KAR

BENGALURU-560 064.

SMT. KEMPAMMA W/O VEERANNA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/AT NALLALA VILLAGE, HOSAKOTE TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT BENGALURU-562114

SRI D. KRISHNAPPA S/O DODDANNA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,

SRI D. SRINIVAS S/O DODDANNA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,

APPELLANT NOS.6 AND 7 ARE R/AT THIRUMALENAHALLI VILLAGE, BIDARAHALLI HOBLI, BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BENGALURU-560 064.

…APPELLANTS

(BY SRI. VENKATACHALAPATHI S.K., ADVOCATE)

AND:

UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, SENA BHAVAN, NEW DELHI-110001.

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:21095 RFA No. 584 of 2026

HC-KAR

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560 001.

THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE DISTRICT, VISHWESHWARAIAH TOWERS, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-560 001.

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, BANGALORE NORTH SUB-DIVISION, VISHWESHWARAIAH TOWERS, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE - 560001.

SRI DODDANANJAPPA SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS:

SMT. CHIKKAMUNIYAMMA W/O.LATE DODDANANJAPPA AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS OCC: HOUSE WIFE

SRI BAIYANNA S/O DODDANANJAPPA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS OCC: AGRICULTURE SRI NARAYANASWAMY, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS:

SMT. PARVATHAMMA W/O NARAYANASWAMY AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE,

4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:21095 RFA No. 584 of 2026

HC-KAR

SRI RAMESH

S/O NARAYANASWAMY AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE

SRI.MADHU S/O NARAYANASWAMY AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE

SMT. MALATI W/O NARAYANASWAMY, D/O NARAYANAWAMY, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST

SRI MUNIRAJU S/O NARAYANASWAMY AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST

SRI CHIKKANNA

SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS:

NAGARAJAPPA S/O CHIKKANNA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,

SMT. SHAMALA D/O CHIKKANNA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,

SRI JAYARAJAPPA S/O CHIKKANNA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:21095 RFA No. 584 of 2026

HC-KAR

SMT. SUNANDAMMA W/O KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,.

SRI CHANDRASHEKAR S/O CHIKKANNA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,..

SMT. NAGAVENI D/O CHIKKANNA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,

THE RESPONDENT NOS.5 TO 17 ARE R/AT THIRUMALENAHALLI VILLAGE, BIDARAHALLI HOBLI, BANGALORE EAST TALUK. BANGALORE-560 064.

SMT. CHANDRAKALA W/O NAGARAJ, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/AT GORAVANAHALLI VILLAGE, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562 110

SMT. SUMITRA W/O NARAYANA SWAMY AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,

SRI GANESH S/O NARAYANA SWAMY AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,

NC: 2026:KHC:21095 RFA No. 584 of 2026

6 -

HC-KAR

APPELLANT NOS.3 AND 4 ARE R/AT RAMAGONDANAHALLI VILLAGE, YELAHANKA POST, BENGALURU-560 064.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.N.K. SIDDESWARA, ADVOCATE FOR CAVEATOR/RESPONDENT NOS.8 AND 12)

THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 20.01.2026, PASSED IN O.S.NO.604/2002 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR DECLARATION.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

ORAL JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed against the judgment and decree dated 20.01.2026 passed in O.S.No.604/2002 by the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Benglauru.

Office raised an objection that the value of the suit property does not exceed a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- and therefore, the appeal is to be filed before the District Court. The learned counsel for the appellant does not dispute the above.

7 -

NC: 2026:KHC:21095 RFA No. 584 of 2026

HC-KAR

In that view of the matter, this appeal is dismissed

as not maintainable before this Court and hence, is rejected. Liberty is reserved to the appellant to file an appropriate appeal before the appropriate Court.

Office is directed to return the certified copy of the impugned judgment and decree after retaining a photocopy. The time consumed in pursuing this appeal shall be deducted while considering the limitation applicable to an appeal before the appropriate Court. The documents filed by the appellant along with IA for production of additional documents shall be returned to the appellant after retaining photocopies.

Sd/(R. NATARAJ) JUDGE

BKN

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10