G V IYENGAR Vs. A R SAMPATHKUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties. Perused the record.

(2.) To state in brief, the plaintiff, who is respondent No.1 in the present Appeal, claims to be nephew of Dr. Gopal Ayengar, who was the member of The Mysore Co-operative Housing Society, respondent No.2. As a member, the plot No.73 was allotted to Dr. Gopal Ayengar by the Society on which he had constructed a bungalow. Admittedly, Dr. Gopal Ayengar died in September 1992 leaving behind only his widow Mrs. Rajalakshmi. She also died in the year 2002. The present appellant No.1/defendant No.5 claims to be a distant nephew of Rajalakshmi Ayengar. Appellant No.2/defendangt No.6 claims to be the power of attorney holder for the defendant No.5 who is residing in U.S.A. The plaintiff claims to be in possession of the said bungalow and also claims to be nephew and the legal heir of Dr. Gopal Ayengar. He filed BCCC Suit No.2023 of 2005 seeking several reliefs. The appellants/defendants Nos. 5 and 6 raised the preliminary objection about the maintainability of the suit on two grounds. Firstly, that the suit is not tenable before the City Civil Court and secondly, the suit is not valued properly for the purpose of pecuniary jurisdiction and Court fees. According to them, The market value of the property is more than Rs.60 lakhs. and, therefore, the City Civil Court does not have jurisdiction to entertain the suit. After hearing the parties, the learned trial Court rejected the contention of defendants Nos. 5 and 6 and held that the suit is not for possession but only for declaration of lawful possession and other consequential reliefs and therefore it is within the jurisdiction of the City Civil Court and is properly valued.

(3.) The relevant prayers made in the plaint are as follows :-