IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGA;;G"R§ %
DATED THIS me 29"' cm: 0? my if}
8EF°RE%% T { %
THE HUMBLE MR_.3zJs3'ICE H}BxL:ARPA " %
W.P W§z;;g
Sri.S.!(.Shankara Rae, -. V V'
S/o.Iate Krishnappa, .
Aged about 75:..~;ea_zfs;_« A
R/a.Paiaha||i 'Vi-Biagg}
Bciagoia Hcibli, "
Srirangapat:1a.Ta!iii§:, ' V *
Mandy3Di$irict;, ..PETIT£ONER
(By SriV."G.S'.B_hat,. H "
Z .....
V $,!9.Puttaiah,"'«.._
Aged Ta'i:-autycgrsr
R1'?-N°¥11';~Vi._ - -
Jangamma cam,
sa:epet,*' %
Bangalcre-5:60 053. .. RESPONDENT
‘ This WP is filed under Artides 226 8; 227 of the Constitution
% India praying to quash we order passed by me Court of Prhcivil
Judge (Jr.Dn.) at Srirangapatna in I.A.No.7, in O.S.No.10/O6 dt.14-
12-2007 vide Ann.A.
L/%
This W.P. coming on for preliminary hearing
Court: made tine foilowing:
In this writ petifion under Aimjdcgse ~§§25ii»£§rid::’227fef.”tiii3A
Consfimfion of India, the petéeener eaiied’ ‘
ordey dated 14-12-2007 by_ th’e”‘«*’:riai,..3Court in
o.s.no.1n/zone-an i
2. 1i:epeiationerjmie.a,”;.A.Nu.? under Section ISIACPC
&&&& _ V
praying to dir;=;;;t_ti1e pieintiff te fiie fresh vaiuafion. The trial
Court has_ rejected aqe,g°,3;3iicaucn.
Aggi’ieved…by that, the petitioner has fiied this writ
. {earned coansel for the petitioner contended
‘ V \/aiccaol
H K “that, suit shouid have been 1; under section 2403) of the
Court Fees and Suitvsvaiuation Act and therefore,
iv
‘V “the trial Court was not justified in rejecting the appiication.
V
S. I do nat: find any mait in this contention, for thgl…fl ”
reason, the suit is far recovew of possession and arrears”:t:~f ‘ %
ream and therefore, the suit is valued under gaf * ,
the Kamama Court Fees and sulmvaluama A¢r§n:l pmper
Ex
court fee has been paid. Since the suit is defilaéiltldh,
there is no merit in the contena’ovr:A*-fiat: haxle
been valued under section of-tl*..é
and Suit://aluafien Act.___ the
application. Thereforl-gfilil’ there is no
merit in this ll: is liable to be
dismissed.
dismlssedvl lllll .
Saiég
6
mag