SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1976 Supreme(Kar) 121

B.VENKATASWAMI, D.NORONHA
SHRINIVAS KENHERI KULKARNI – Appellant
Versus
SUBBAPPA MEHETRU NIDAGALKAR – Respondent


VENKATASWAMI, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal under Section 43 (1) of the Code, of Civil Procedure is by the plaintiff in O. S. No. 24/73 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge, Belgaum. He is aggrieved by an order made therein directing the return of the plaint for presentation to the proper court having jurisdiction to try the suit.

( 2 ) THE material facts leading upto the appeal, briefly, are as follows:the appellant filed the suit for a decree of permanent injunction on the ground that the respondents herein had denied his title to the suit property an agricultural land separately numbered and assessed for the purpose of land revenue. He valued the suit for the purposes of court-fee on the basis of the provisions of Section 7 (2) (b) of the Karnataka Court-fees and Suits valuation Act, 1958 (Court-fees Act, for short), at Rs. 251-69 P. and paid court-fee thereon. But, for the purpose of jurisdiction, the market value- of the land was stated as Rs. 54,000/ -. In view of the latter valuation, the suit came to be instituted in the Court of the Civil Judge. On behalf of the respondents (defendants) this valuation on the basis- of the market value was conceded as correct, but it was conte















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top