Monday, 04, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

B Prashanti W/O. Tirupati Reddy vs Ravindra S/O. Dundappa Katodi
2021 Latest Caselaw 6194 Kant

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 6194 Kant
Judgement Date : 15 December, 2021

Karnataka High Court
B Prashanti W/O. Tirupati Reddy vs Ravindra S/O. Dundappa Katodi on 15 December, 2021
Bench: Ravi V.Hosmani
               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                       DHARWAD BENCH

           DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021

                            BEFORE

            THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI V. HOSMANI

              REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.4016/2012
BETWEEN:

B. PRASHANTI W/O. TIRUPATI REDDY
AGE: 40 YEARS
OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK
R/O. SAMPIGE NAGAR, KELAGERI ROAD
DHARWAD, REP. BY HER GPA HOLDER,
SHRI B. TIRUPATI REDDY S/O. B. SIDDA REDDY
AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: CONTRACTOR,
R/O. SAMPIGE NAGER, KELAGERI ROAD.
                                                  ...APPELLANT

(BY SHRI B.V.SOMAPUR, SHRI C.B.SHAKUNAVALLI, SHRI S.M.NADAF
AND SHRI R.P.UGARGOL, ADVOCATES)

AND:

1.     RAVINDRA S/O. DUNDAPPA KATODI
       AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE SERVICE
       R/O. AMARNAGAR, SUTAGATTI
       TQ. AND DIST: DHARWAD.

2.     MAHADEVI GURAPPA SIDDAMANI
       AGE: 59 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS
       R/O. AMARNAGAR, SUTAGATTI
       TQ. AND DIST: DHARWAD.

3.     ARUNA W/O. SHANKAR GARGI
       AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK
       R/O. GUTTAL, TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD.

4.     NEELAWWA W/O DUNDAPPA KATODI
       AGE: 79 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
                               2




      R/O. SAMPIGE NAGAR,
      OPP. SHANTINIKETAN NAGAR,
      KELAGERI-SADHANKERI ROAD, DHARWAD,
      TQ: & DIST: DHARWAD.

      (DECEASED, REP. BY HER LEGAL HEIRS
      WHO ARE ALREADY ON RECORD AS
      RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 3 AND 5 HEREIN.)

5.    MAHALINGESHWAR
      S/O DUNDAPPA KATODI
      AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS
      R/O. SAMPIGE NAGAR,
      OPP. SHANTINIKETAN NAGAR,
      KELAGERI-SADHANKERI ROAD, DHARWAD,
      TQ: & DIST: DHARWAD.

6.    SHANTAYYA S/O.SHIVAPUTRAYYA HIREMATH
      AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
      R/O. KELAGERI, DHARWAD.,

7.    IRAYYA S/O. SHIVAPUTRAYYA HIREMATH
      AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
      R/O. KELAGERI, DHARWAD.

8.    ANAND S/O.PADMAPPA JAINER
      AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
      R/O.KELAGERI, DHARWAD.

9.    KALLAPPA S/O. PADMAPPA JAINER
      AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
      R/O.KELAGERI, DHARWAD.

10.   DEVENDRAPPA S/O.PADMAPPA JAINER
      AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
      R/O.KELAGERI, DHARWAD.
                                              ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SHRI B.K.MALLIGWAD, ADVOCATE, FOR R.1 TO R.3;
SHRI D.B.KALLANGOUDAR, ADVOCATE, FOR R5;
SHRI ANAND BAGEWADI, ADVOCATE, FOR R6 & R7;
SHRI GIRISH S. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE, FOR R.8 TO R.10;
R.4 - DECEASED, REP. BY R.1 TO R.3 AND R.5.)
                                 3




      THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96
READ WITH ORDER 41 RULE 1 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE,
1980, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED
09.01.2012 PASSSED IN O.S.NO.61/2008, ON THE FILE OF THE III
ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, DHARWAD, ETC.,.

     THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                            JUDGMENT

Learned counsel for appellant and respondents filed a

compromise petition signed by all parties and their respective

counsel and submitted that parties have entered into a

compromise and terms of compromise are reduced into writing.

Parties are present before the Court and they are identified by

their respective counsel.

2. I have perused the compromise petition. The parties

are present in Court, identified by their respective counsel. They

stated that the compromise petition has been read over and

explained to them in Kannada language known to them. They

accept the same as true and correct and that compromise has

been entered into voluntarily without any force, undue influence

or coercion. The terms are lawful, bona fide and in the best

interest of parties. Hence, compromise is accepted.

3. The consideration amount of * forty lakh rupees as

mentioned in compromise petition is paid by appellant to

respondents no.2 and 3 by way of *four cheques as mentioned

in compromise petition. Respondents and their counsel

acknowledge receipt of cheques subject to realization.

4. It is stated that amount of Rs.3,34,530/- is

deposited by plaintiff no.1 Ravindra. All the parties agree that

he would be entitled to receive or withdraw the same from this

Court.

5. In view of above compromise, impugned decree is

set aside. Appeal is disposed of in terms of compromise petition.

Registry to draw decree accordingly.

Since parties have entered into compromise, registry is

directed to refund admissible Court fee to appellant.

Sd/-

JUDGE Mrk/-

* Corrected vide Court order dated 11.03.2022 sd/-

(RVHJ)

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter