Karnataka High Court
Sunil S/O Tukaram Sambrani vs Shri Gouse Alahajam S/O Kashimsab ... on 25 October, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:14251
RSA No. 100657 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 100657 OF 2025 (INJ-)
BETWEEN:
SUNIL S/O. TUKARAM SAMBRANI,
AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS,
R/O VIVEKANANDA CIRCLE AKKIPETH,
SUBHAS ROAD, DHARWAD- 580001.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. PRANAV UMESH BADAGI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SHRI GOUSE ALAHAJAM
S/O. KASHIMSAB MAKANDAR
@ BABU MAKANDAR,
AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS,
R/O. VIVEKANANDA CIRCLE, AKKIPETH,
SUBHAS ROAD, DHARWAD- 580001.
2. THE COMMISIONER,
YASHAVANT HUBBALLI DHARWAD MUNICIPAL CORPORTION,
NARAYANKAR DHARWAD- 580008.
Digitally signed by
YASHAVANT
...RESPONDENTS
NARAYANKAR
Date: 2025.10.27
(BY SRI. M.G. RAHUT, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
10:44:17 +0530
SRI. R.H. ANGADI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 R/W. ORDER 41 RULE
1 OF CPC, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE TRIAL COURT RECORDS
PERUSE THE SAME AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND
DECREE PASSED IN R.A.NO.63/2024, DATED 02.06.2025 BY THE 1ST
ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, DHARWAD AND
CONSEQUENTLY CONFIRM THE JUDGMENT AND DECRE PASSED IN OS
NO.280/2019 DATED 15.07.2024 BY THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND
PRINCIPAL JMFC COURT, DHARWAD BY ALLOWING THE PRESENT
APPEAL TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:14251
RSA No. 100657 of 2025
HC-KAR
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI
ORAL JUDGMENT
The appellant and respondent No.1 are present along with their learned counsels.
2. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2/Commissioner, Hubballi-Dharwad Municipal Corporation, Dharwad is also present.
3. The appellant and respondent No.1 filed a compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 of CPC recording the settlement reached between the appellant and respondent No.1. By virtue of the settlement, respondent No.1 has agreed to remove the obstruction (pillar) placed by him in the gutter involved in the lis. By virtue of this settlement, the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court seems to be restored to some extent.
4. The learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that, he being the formal party in the lis, it is agreeable for him, -3- NC: 2025:KHC-D:14251 RSA No. 100657 of 2025 HC-KAR if respondent No.1 removes the obstruction placed on the gutter and it would not affect his rights in any way.
5. On questioning respondent No.1, he submits that contents of the compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 of CPC is explained to him. The parties acknowledge the contents of the same. Respondent No.1 confirms that he will remove the obstruction placed on the gutter. Therefore, the compromise being just proper and legal, the same is accepted. Hence, the following:
ORDER
i) The appeal is allowed.
ii) The impugned judgment of the First Appellate Court is set aside.
iii) This appeal is disposed of in terms of the compromise petition filed under Order XXIII Rule 3 of CPC.
iv) Decree be drawn as per the compromise petition and the compromise petition shall be part of the decree.
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:14251 RSA No. 100657 of 2025 HC-KAR
v) The appeal against respondent No.2 is dismissed.
SD/-
(C M JOSHI) JUDGE SSP CT:PA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 61