Judgement

B. P. JEEVAN REDDY, J.:- In this appeal preferred against the judgment of the Karnataka High Court, the question that arises is whether the suit filed by the appellants in the civil court questioning the revision of property tax in the year 1984 is not barred by virtue of Rule 25 contained in Part-I of Schedule-III of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976? The suit was initially instituted by three persons. While plaintiffs 1 and 3 are two of the house-owners within Belgaum Municipal Corporation, the second plaintiff is an Association of house-owners within the said Corporation limits. Subsequently, fourteen other individuals owning houses within the said corporation limits joined as plaintiffs. The relief asked for in the plaint is for a declaration that the revision of property tax effected by the defendant Corporation in the year 1984 is arbitrary, unreasonable and illegal and should not be enforced against the owners of the houses in Belgaum.The Trial Court dismissed the suit as not maintainable in Civil Court by virtue of Rule 25 aforesaid. On appeal, however, the first Appellate Court took a contrary view. It held that the suit is maintainable and , accordin