A Civil Revision Petition is not maintainable if a prior application under specific rules is partly allowed.

Headnote:The Court addressed an office objection regarding the maintainability of the Civil Revision Petition. It was acknowledged that the petition filed under Order VII Rule 11 and Section 11(2) of the Karnataka Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1958 was partly allowed, leading to the conclusion that the Civil Revision Petition could not be maintained. Consequently, the petitioners were granted liberty to file an appeal.

Table of Content
1. the maintainability of a civil revision petition is contingent upon previous application outcomes. (Para 1)
2. the petitioners are allowed to file an appeal as a subsequent course of action. (Para 2)

ORAL ORDER

Office objection is raised regarding maintainability of the Civil Revision Petition on the ground that the application filed under Order VII Rule 11 and under Section 11 (2) of the Karnataka Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1958 is partly allowed and therefore a Civil Revision Petition cannot be maintained.

2. Office objection is upheld. The Civil Revision Petition is disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioners to file an appeal.

Ordered accordingly.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

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

Scan Me!

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

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 8917

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKAR DEVDASSRI PRABHAKAR REDDY – AppellantVersusSRI RAJAGOPAL REDDY V – RespondentCRP 201/2026

A Civil Revision Petition is not maintainable if a prior application under specific rules is partly allowed.

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
R DEVDAS
SRI PRABHAKAR REDDY – Appellant
Versus
SRI RAJAGOPAL REDDY V – Respondent
CRP 201/2026