Smt. R. Bhagya vs Smt. Sarojadevi W/O Ravindra @ ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 1724 Kant

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                     DHARWAD BENCH

          DATED THIS THE 9 T H DAY OF MARCH, 2021

                           PRESENT

     THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR

                              AND

           THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

                M.F.A. No. 100302/2018 (FC)
BETWEEN:

1.     SMT. R. BHAGYA, AGE: 40 YEARS,
       OCC.: HOUSEHOLD, R/O MIG 10,
       5 T H CROSS, 2 N D MAIN, III STAGE,
       H BLOCK, RAMAKRISHNA NAGAR,
       MYSORE.

2.     KUM. GOURI D/O R. BHAGYA,
       AGE: 22 YEARS, OCC.: STUDENT,
       R/O MIG 10, 5 T H CROSS, 2 N D MAIN,
       III STAGE, H BLOCK,
       RAMAKRISHNA NAGAR, MYSORE.

3.     BHUVANESHWARI,
       D/O RAVINDRA KONNUR,
       AGE: ABOUT 28 YEARS,
       OCC.: HOMEMAKER,
       R/O # 368, 1 S T CROSS,
       5 T H MAIN, MYSORE-570 002.
                                              -   APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. GOPALKRISHNA R. KOLLI,
ADVOCATE FOR APPELLANT NOS.1 AND 2,
(BY SRI. PRAKASH R. BADIGER.
ADVOCATE FOR APPELLANT NO.3)

AND:
                             :2:


1.   SMT. SAROJADEVI W/O RAVINDRA @
     RAVI KONNUR, AGE ABOUT 45 YEARS,
     OCC.: HOUSEHOLD, R/O MALLIGAWAD,
     TQ: HUBBALLI, DISTRICT: DHARWAD.

2.   PRAVEEN S/O RAVINDRA @
     RAVI KONNUR, AGE ABOUT 28 YEARS,
     OCC.: NIL, R/O MALLIGAWAD,
     TQ: HUBBALLI, DISTRICT: DHARWAD.

3.   VENKATESH S/O RAVINDRA @
     RAVI KONNUR, AGE ABOUT 26 YEARS,
     OCC.: HOUSEHOLD, R/O MALLIGAWAD,
     TQ: HUBBALLI, DISTRICT: DHARWAD.

4.   TUMKUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,
     TUMKUR, REPTD.
     BY ITS COMMISSIONER.
                                -            RESPONDENTS
(BY S.D. KULKARNI,
ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3)

     THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER

SECTION 19(1) OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT AGAINST THE

JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 15.11.2017 PASSED IN

O.S. NO. 13/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE,

FAMILY COURT, HUBBALLI & ETC.

     THIS M ISC E L LA N E OU S F IRS T APPEAL COMING ON FOR

PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, SREENIVAS HARISH

KUMAR, J PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
                                      :3:


                                   ORDER

The appellants no.1 to 3 and respondents No.1 to 3

have presented a compromise petition under Order XXIII

Rule 3 of CPC. The appellants and the respondents 1 to 3

are present with their respective Advocates.

2. The contents of the compromise petition are read

over and explained to the parties in Kannada language

that they know. They submit that they have voluntarily

arrived at a settlement in the manner stated in the

compromise petition and that they have signed the

compromise petition on their own accord. Terms of the

compromise petition are lawful and therefore compromise

is accepted.

3. So far as M.F.A. No. 5873/2017 and M.F.A. No.

104367/2017, they arise from the award passed in two

motor vehicle claim petitions made pursuant to the death

of one Ravindra S. Konnur. One appeal is filed in High

Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench and the other on the

Principal Bench at Bengaluru. These appeals are still

pending and they are yet to be disposed of. After disposal

of these two appeals, the parties have agreed to share the

award amount as stated in paragraph No. 4(d) of the

compromise.

In view of the compromise arrived at by the parties,

the appeal is disposed of in terms of the compromise.

Draw decree accordingly.

SD/-

JUDGE

SD/-

JUDGE

bv v