Karnataka High Court
Smt. Rekha W/O Prabhu Biliyali vs Smt. Sharadabai W/O Babu Akkole on 21 December, 2021
Bench: Ravi V.Hosmani
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 21 T H DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI
R.S.A.No.100179/2018
BETWEEN:
SMT. REKHA W/O PRABHU BI LIYALI,
AGE: 56 YEARS , OCC: HOUS EHOLD WORK,
R/O: 3527, RISALDAR GALLI,
BELGAVI- 590001.
... APPELLANT
(BY SRI.SANGRAM S.K ULKARNI, ADV OCATE)
AND
SMT. SHARADABAI E/O BABU AKKOLE,
AGE:65 Y EARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD W ORK,
R/O: 3527, RISALDAR GALLI,
BELGAVI- 590001.
... RES PONDENT
(BY SRI.B.S .KAMATE, ADV OCATE)
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEA L IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 173( 1) OF MOTOR V EHICLES ACT, 1988, PRA YING TO
SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED IN REGULAR APPEAL
No,06/2013 DATED 23.01.2018 BY THE 6TH ADD ITIONAL
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BELGAVI AND THE ORDER
/DECREE IN FDP No.06/2001 PASS ED BY THE II ADDL SENIOR
CIVIL J UDGE, BELGAVI DATED 13.09.2012.
THIS APPEAL COMI NG ON F OR ADMISSION THIS DAY, T HE
COURT , D ELIVERED THE F OLLOWING:
2
JUDGMENT
The present appeal is filed by the appellant in RA
No.06/2013 dated 23.01.2018 passed by 6 t h Addl.
District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi, arising out of
final decree proceedings in terms of judgment and
decree in OS No.81/1990 modified in RFA No.89/1995
vide judgment and decree dated 13.01.1998. The
present dispute is regarding total measurement of suit
property.
2. Sri.Sangram S. Kulkarni, learned counsel for
appellant submits that consequent to an erroneous
entry of measurement of southern side of the suit
property as '26' feets '0' inch instead of correct
measurement of '20' feets '6' inchs, higher than actual
area was considered for division of property by Court
in final decree proceedings. On this ground appeal is
filed.
3. During pendency of this appeal, parties have
amicably settled the dispute between them.
4. A joint memo recording terms and conditions of
settlement is drawn which read as follows:
1. The plaintiff/ respondent has agre ed to
rece ive 400sq.ft land towards her share in
the suit prope rty in the Southe rn hind
portion and she is in possession.
2. The appe llant/defendant shall re tain the
remaining portio n of the suit property
towards her share on the Northern side of
the suit schedule prope rty.
3. The plaintiff/ respondent has agre ed to
permit the appe llant/responde nt to use
the drainage connectio n pipe line which
passes through the area allo tte d to her
and also agree d not to create any
obstruction or disturbance fo r the use of
the drainage at any time in future.
4. The parties agree d that there is an error
in the Court Commissione rs repo rt
regarding the measureme nt.
5. The appe llant/ defendant has agreed to
give mo re area to the plaintiff/respondent
that the area she is actually entitled for
as the plaintiff/re sponde nt has agre ed for
uninterrupted use of the drainage pipe line
passing through the area allotted to
plaintiff/ responde nt.
6. Both the parties seek the leave of the
court to prese nt appropriate applicatio n,
map showing the details o f the settlement
to be presented in the E.P. No .96/2018
pending on the file o f 2 n d A ddl. Senior
Civil Judge , Be lagavi.
7. In view o f this j oint memo the parties
admit that all their claims against each
other are settled once for all and that
they shall not rack up any dispute in
future .
8. The contents o f this jo int memo shall be
binding on parties, the ir legal he irs,
successors in interest and assignees.
9. The partie s have entere d into this jo int
memo o ut of their free will and full
knowledge. The contents are re ad over
and explaine d in kannada to the partie s.
5. Learned counsel for appellant submitted that
though Execution Petition No.96/2018 on the file of II
Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Belagavi, was closed due to
pendency of this appeal, the parties have agreed to
revive the same and by producing exact map or sketch
etc. in furtherance of this joint memo, they would get
appropriate further orders from Executing Court.
Submission is placed on record.
6. Both the parties are present and are
identified by respective counsel. They have affirmed
that the settlement is entered into voluntarily without
any threat, coercion or inducement and submit that
appeal may be disposed of in terms of above
settlement.
7. I have perused the terms and conditions
mentioned in the joint memo. Same are lawful and in
the best interest of the parties. Joint memo signed by
parties as well as respective counsel is taken on
record.
8. In view of the above, appeal is disposed of
modifying the impugned judgment in terms of joint
memo.
9. Registry to draw decree incorporating terms
of joint memo.
10. In view of disposal of appeal, IAs are
disposed of as having become unnecessary.
Sd/-
JUDGE
H MB
