Sri Mathivanan vs Sri P Chezhian
2022 Latest Caselaw 1636 Kant

                               1


       IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

         DATED THIS THE 03RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022

                            PRESENT

            THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.NARENDAR

                              AND

     THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

             REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.1203/2012

BETWEEN:

SRI MATHIVANAN
S/O LATE PERUMAL,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.107,
ITC COLONY,
JEEVANAHALLI,
COX TOWN,
BANGALORE 560 005
                                             ... APPELLANT

(BY SRI B.C.VENKATESH, ADV.)

AND:

1.     SRI P CHEZHIAN
       S/O LATE PERUMAL,
       AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
       RESIDING AT NO.107,
       ITC COLONY,
       JEEVANAHALLI,
       COX TOWN,
       BANGALORE - 560 005.

2.     SMT KALAVATHI
       W/O SRI SELVAMANI,
       D/O LATE PERUMAL,
                             2


     AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
     RESIDING AT NO.79/1,
     BAJANAI,
     1ST COIL STREEET,
     VADAPALANI,
     CHENNAI-26.

3.   SRI P GUNANITHI
     S/O LATE PERUMAL,
     AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
     RESIDING AT NO.107,
     ITC COLONY,
     JEEVANAHALLI,
     COX TOWN,
     BANGALORE - 560 005.

4.   SMT. AMUDA,
     W/O SRI PRAKASH,
     D/O LATE PERUMAL,
     AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
     RESIDING AT B.D.A COMPLEX,
     NEELASANDRA,
     BANGALORE - 560047.
                                         ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI B.J.VEERENDRA KUMAR, ADV. FOR C/R1 TO R4.)

     THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED U/SEC.96, R/W,
O-XLI, RULE-1 AND 2 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND
DECREE DATED12.04.2012 PASSED IN O.S.4147/2009 ON THE
FILE OF THE XXXVIII-ADDL. CITY CIVIL JUDGE, BANGALORE,
PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT FOR PARTITION AND SEPARATE
POSSESSION.


     THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THIS DAY, G.NARENDAR J, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                3


                          JUDGMENT

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the

learned counsel for the respondents.

2. Pursuant to the order dated 21.01.2022, the

parties have appeared before the Registrar (Judicial). The

Registrar (Judicial) has interacted with the parties, has

verified their original identity cards and identified the

parties and has submitted the report dated 24.01.2022. A

report reads as under:-

"REPORT

In RFA No. 1203/2012, this Hon'ble Court vide order dated 21.01.2022, has passed the following order:

"The parties have filed a Compromise Petition under Order 23 Rule 3 of CPC. It is submitted that the dispute in the appeal is amicably resolved by the parties.

In that view of the matter, the appeal is to be disposed of in terms of the Compromise Petition.

The parties shall appear before the Registrar (Judicial) today at 2.30 p.m., and Registrar (Judicial) shall ascertain the identity on the basis of the documents produced and submit a Report by the next date of hearing.

List on 27.01.2022".

2. It is submitted that learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents and the

appellant and respondent Nos.1 to 4 appeared before me on 21.01.2022 at 3:00 p.m.

3. It is submitted that appellant and respondent Nos. 1 to 4 have produced their original Identity Cards. The appellant and respondent Nos.1 to 4 have stated before me that they have accepted the terms and conditions stated in the Compromise Petition.

4. It is further stated that on verifying the original Identity Cards produced by appellant and respondent Nos.1 to 4, the following discrepancies have been found with respect to following parties:

Appellant/ Name stated in the Name mentioned in Resp. Nos. Memorandum of Petition Aadhaar Card Appl. Sri Mathivanan Sri Mathivanan S/o Late Perumal S/o Perumall R1 Sri. P.Chezhian Sri Chezian P S/o Late Perumal S/o Perumal R2 Smt. Kalavathi Smt. Kalavathi S W/o Selvamani W/o Selvamani R3 Sri P.Gunanithi Smt. P.Gunanithy S/o Late Perumal S/o P.K.Perumal R4 Smt. Amuda Smt Amudha W/o Sri Prakash Prakash W/o A. Prakash

5. The original Identity Cards produced by the appellant and respondent Nos.1 to 4 have been verified and the self attested copies of the said Identity Cards are enclosed herewith.

The report is submitted before the Hon'ble Court for kind perusal.

Sd/-

Date: 24.01.2022 (K.S.Bharath Kumar Registrar (Judicial)"

3. The learned counsels submit that there is no

dispute with regard to the identity of the parties and that

they have identified the appellant and respondents.

4. The submissions is placed on record.

5. A compromise petition is preferred by the parties

with the provisions of Order XXIII Rule 3 read with Section

151 of the Civil Procedure Code and the same reads as

under:-

"COMPROMISE PETITION FILED UNDER ORDER XXIII RULE 3 READ WITH SECTION 151 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE BY THE APPELLANT AND RESPONDENTS

The Appellant and Respondents above named beg to submit as follows:-

1. The appellant submits that the respondents had filed suit O.S.No.4147/2009 against the appellant on the file of the XXXVIII Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge at Bengaluru (CCH-39) seeking partition and separate possession in respect of the property involved in the appeal. The Trial court vide its order dated.20/7/2012 decreed the suit as prayed for.

2. The Appellant and Respondents during the pendency of the appeal, at the intervention of friends and well-wishers, they have settled their disputes on the following terms.

3. The Appellant and Respondents submit that, they have mutually agreed to sell the Schedule Property jointly and share the sale consideration amount in the following ratio:

(i) For Appellant: 50%(Fifty Percent)

(ii) For First Respondent 12.5%(Twelve Point Five Percent)

(ii) For Second Respondent:12.5% (Twelve Point Five Percent)

(iv) Third Respondent: 12.5% (Twelve Point Five Percent)

(v) Fourth Respondent: 12.5% (Twelve Point Five Percent)

4. The Appellant and Respondents shall execute and register sale deed jointly in favor of proposed buyer and share the sale consideration amount as per the ratio mentioned above after deducting statutory payments if any.

5. The Appellant and Respondents submit that, they have settled the case and signed this Compromise Petition on their own without any coercion, force, misrepresentation, fraud.

Wherefore, the Appellant and Respondents pray that this Hon'ble court may be pleased to decree the Appeal in terms of the Compromise entered above and direct the office to draw final decree accordingly and grant such other and reliefs in the interest of justice and equity.

VERIFICATION

We, Mr.Mathivanan the appellant herein and Mr.P.Chezhian, Smt. Kalavathi, Mr.P.Gunanithi and Smt.Amuda the respondents herein, do hereby declare that what is stated above are all true and correct to the best of our knowledge, information and belief.

  Sd/-                            Sd/-
Appellant                    Respondent No.1

      Sd/-
Advocate for appellant

B.C.Venkatesh:Kar:1625/2000

Sd/-

Respondent No.2

Sd/-

Respondent No.3

Sd/-

Respondent No.4

Sd/-

Advocate for respondents Sri.B.J.Veerendra Kumar KAR:286/1989"

6. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed.

7. Office to draw-up a decree in terms of the

compromise.

Parties shall be entitled to refund of permissible Court

fee.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

Chs CT-HR