Basamma W/O Laxmayya Chowdari ... vs Bheemavva W/O Hanamanth Bellodgi ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 5309 Kant

                            1



            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                   KALABURAGI BENCH
     DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER-2021
                        PRESENT
           THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R. DEVDAS
                           AND
 THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJENDRA BADAMIKAR

              RFA NO.200029/2015 (DEC/POS)

BETWEEN:

1.    Basamma W/o Laxmayya Choudri (Waddar)
      Aged about: 68 years, Occ: H.H.Work,

2.    Bhimashankar S/o Laxmayya Choudri (Waddar)
      Aged about: 52 years, Occ: Driver,

3.    Laxmayya @ Laxmanna
      S/o Laxmayya Choudri (Waddar)
      Since Dead, Vide order dated 28.10.2021 no issue
      and no legal heirs.

4.    Ambanna @ Ambu
      S/o Laxmayya Choudri (Waddar)
      Aged about: 38 years, Occ: Coolie,
      Since Dead his LRs.

      a)     Smt. Kamala W/o Ambanna,
             Aged about: 36 years, Occ: H.H.Work,

      b)     Laxman S/o Late Ambanna,
             Aged about: 10 years, Occ: Student,
             Since Minor R/by his mother Kamala i.e.
             appellant No.4(a).
                             2




       All appellants No.1 to 4(a) & (b)
       R/at: Jafer Ganj Near Hanuman Temple,
       Chittapur, Tq: Chittapur,
       Dist: Kalaburagi-585211.

5.     Lalita W/o Laxmayya Malkal,
       Aged about: 48 years, Occ: Coolie work,
       R/at: Laxmapur Wadi (Gandi Nagar),
       Tq: Chittapur, Dist: Kalaburagi-585211.

6.     Fakiramma W/o Mallanna Bhajantri,
       Aged about: 68 years, Occ: Agriculture & Labour,

7.     Shankar S/o Mallanna Bhajantri,
       Age: 46 years, Occ: Agriculture,

       A-6 & A-7 are R/at near Vantkaman,
       Near Sharanappa Bhairi House,
       Chittapur, Tq: Chittapur,
       Dist: Kalaburagi-585211.
                                            ... Appellants
(By Sri. S.V.Deshmukh, Advocate)

AND:
1.     Bheemavva W/o Hanamanth Bellodagi
       D/o Late Laxmayya @ Laxmayya Choudri
       (Waddar)
       Age: 66 years, Occ: Household,
2.     Rajamma W/o Bhimayya Dongaon
       D/o Late Laxmayya @ Laxmayya Choudri
       (Waddar)
       Age: 54 years, Occ: Household,
       Both are R/at: Jafer Ganj Itaga Road,
       Near Hanuman Temple, Chittapur,
       Tq: Chittapur, Dist: Kalaburagi-585211.
                             3




3.   Bhimawwa W/o Late Chandram Choudri (Waddar)
     Aged about: 62 years, Occ: Household,

4.   Tulajamma D/o Late Chandram Choudri (Waddar)
     Aged about: 62 years, Occ: Household,

     Both are R/at: Jafer Ganj Itaga Road,
     near Hanuman temple, Chittapur,
     Tq: Chittapur, Dist: Kalaburagi.
     Now Residing at : Hoda Village at post: Mudhol,
     Tq: Sedam, Dist: Kalaburagi-585318.
                                       ..... Respondents

(By Sri. B.C.Jaka, Advocate for R2 to R4;
R1-served)

     This RFA is filed under Section 96 R/w Order 41
Rule 1 of CPC, praying to (a) allow the appeal by setting
aside the judgment dated 26.02.2015 passed by the
Senior Civil Judge Chittapur in O.S.No.120/2012 and
further dismiss the said suit with costs throughout in
the interest of justice and equity.   (b) Such further or
other relief's be granted to which the appellants would
be found entitled to on the facts and circumstances or
the case.

     This appeal coming on for orders this day,
Rajendra Badamikar, delivered the following:
                            4




                     JUDGMENT

The parties have filed a compromise petition under

Order 23 Rule 1 of CPC reporting the settlement

amongst themselves. The parties i.e. appellant Nos.1, 2,

5, 6, 7 and appellant No.4A with their counsel are

present before the court. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 and

4 with respective counsels are also present. The

contents of the compromise petition are read over and

explained to the parties in Kannada language known to

them and they admit the contents to be true and

correct. Further appellant No.4(b) is a minor and

application is filed seeking leave of the court under

Order 32 Rule 7 of CPC for compromising the matter on

behalf of the minor appellant No.4(b). The learned

counsel as well as the minor guardian filed certificate

submitting that the settlement is in the interest of the

minor.

2. We are satisfied that the parties have settled

the dispute amicably without any threat or coercion.

Further the settlement is in the interest of both the

parties and is not against any settled law. Hence, the

application filed by minor guardian/appellant No.4(a)

seeking leave for compromising the matter on behalf of

the appellant No.4(b) is allowed and she is permitted to

compromise the matter on behalf of the appellant

No.4(b) also.

3. Since the compromise is in the interest of

both parties, compromise petition filed under Order 23

Rule 1 of CPC is allowed.

4. The appeal stands allowed in terms of the

compromise decree.

5. Draw the decree in terms of the compromise

petition. The compromise petition shall be the part of

the decree.

6. The parties shall affix their signatures /

thumb impressions on the order sheet and same shall

be duly identified by the respective counsels.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

SMP