BILIYANEPPA Vs. DANAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short point for decision is, whether this appeal from the decree dated 1-2-1986 passed by the Civil Judge at Bijapur in Original Suit No. 108 of 1980 pending before the High Court has stood transferred to the District Court at Bijapur under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Karnataka Civil Courts Laws (Amendment) Act, 1989 [for short 'the Amendment Act'] on 17-4-1989, tha date of commencement of the Amendment Act.

(2.) Clause (c) of sub-section (1) ofSection 4 of the Amendment Act, which is of materiality for deciding the said point, reads : "(c) appeals and proceedings connected therewith pending before the High Court from decrees and orders passed by a Civil Judge in original suits or proceedings of a civil nature the amount or value of the subject matter of which is less than one lakh rupees shall, on the date of commencement of this Act, stand transferred to the District Court and shall be disposed of by such courts in accordance with law as if such appeals or proceedings had been preferred to such court." If an appeal before the High Court has to be regarded as having stood transferred to a District Court on the date of commencement of the Amendment Act under the above clause, the requisites to be satisfied are : (i) It must be an appeal from a decree in a original suit or order in a proceeding of a civil nature passed by the Civil Judge ; (ii) the amount or value of the subject matter of such original suit or proceeding of a civil nature must have been less than one lakh rupees.

(3.) The instant appeal being thatpreferred against the decree of the Civil Judge, it satisfies requisite (i) above, was not doubted. But, when it came to the question of the instant appeal satisfying requisite (ii) above, a doubt being raised whether the amount or value of the subject matter of the original suit or proceeding of a civil nature referred to therein is that taken for the purpose of computing the court fee payable under the Karnataka Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1958, or that taken for determining the pecuni-ary jurisdiction of the Court of Civil Judge, we had to hear the learned Government Advocate in the matter.