The appellant has preferred this appeal against the order passed on IA No.III by the III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ramanagara in R.A.No.60/2016 dated 18.7.2017 in holding that, the said Court has no pecuniary jurisdiction to try the appeal and consequently returned the appeal to the appellant (plaintiff No.1 in O.S.No.80/2012) to present the same before the High Court of Karnataka, as the valuation of the subject matter of the suit and appeal exceeds Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs) only.

2. The Registry, after filing of the appeal has raised objections with regard to the jurisdiction of this Court as the subject matter is less than Rs.10,00,000/- and the appeal is also not maintainable under Order XLIII Rule 1(a) of CPC.

3. Keeping open the said office objection, the matter was posted for hearing the counsel’s submission regarding the maintainability of the appeal.

4. No notices have been issued to the respondents as the maintainability of the appeal itself has been questioned in this appeal.

5. The first objection raised by the office is that the appeal is not maintainable under Order XLIII Rule 1(a) of CPC because of the simple reason that the Appellate Cour