LACHAWWA Vs. PANDAPPA HANAMAPPA SHIRAGAVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IT is indeed an unfortunate case wherein the Trial Court at the end of the trial raised a question of jurisdiction that too the pecuniary jurisdiction, even without the defendant raising the same. Holding that it has no pecuniary jurisdiction, Court directed the plaintiff to re-present the plaint before Court of the competent jurisdiction and dismissed the suit as a whole.

(2.) I shall just repeat my observations in a case reported in narasimha Reddy v Narasimha Reddy and Others:

(3.) HEARD Mr. Desai. It appears to me that, disposal of the suit appears to have ignored not only the legal proposition on the point but also the settled principles*. The suit is one for declaration and injunction. Section 24 (a) of the Karnataka Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act reads as follows: