Karnataka High Court
Smt. Brunda Jayaram vs Smt. Kanchana G Talreja on 19 January, 2022
Bench: M.I.Arun
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN
RFA NO.123 OF 2017 (DEC/INJ)
BETWEEN:
SMT. BRUNDA JAYARAM
W/O N. JAYARAM
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.424, 12TH CROSS
SADASHIVANAGAR
BENGALURU-560 089.
APPELLANT
(BY SRI. T.P. VIVEKANANDA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. KANCHANA G. TALREJA
AGED 56 YEARS
W/O GOPAL VASHUMAL TALREJA
C/O. C.T. SIDDA REDDY
RESIDING AT NO.101/B
17TH 'C' MAIN, 5TH BLOCK
KORAMANGALA
BENGALURU -560 095.
2. S. KODANDARAMAIAH
S/O. SEENAPPA MAJOR
RESIDING AT MUTHYALPET
MULBAGAL TOWN AND POST
KOLAR DISTRICT 563131.
3. THE SECRETARY
KENDRA UPADHYAYARA SANGHA
(REGISTERED)
2
BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE
AT NO.24, SUBBARAMASHETY ROAD
BASAVANAGUDI
BENGALURU -560 004.
4. DR. LAISHRAM CHAOBA SINGH
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.73, 4TH CROSS
7TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA
BENGALURU -560 095.
5. SHIVAJI D. PATEL
S/O D.H. PATEL
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
SREE SHARADA TIMBERS
NO.78/1, MAGADI MAIN ROAD
OPPOSITE VEERESH THEATRE
BENGALURU 560 079.
RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. B.V. VIDHULATHA, ADVOCATE FOR RI;
SRI. K.P. BHUVAN, ADVOCATE FOR R3;
R-2,4 AND 5 ARE DELETED V/O DATED 19-1-2022)
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC,
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED
2-11-2016 PASSED IN O.S.NO.2982/2011 BY THE VIII
ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE
BENGALURU (CCH 15) PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT
FOR DECLARATION AND INJUNCTION.
THIS RFA COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THROUGH
VIDEO CONFERENCING THIS DAY THE COURT
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Appellant has filed a memo dated 4-1-2022
praying for deletion of respondent Nos. 2, 4 and 5.
2. Memo is taken on record.
3. Respondent Nos. 2, 4 and 5 are deleted at the
risk and cost of the appellant.
4. The appellant and respondent No.1 have filed
a Compromise Petition dated 23-11-2021 and have
prayed that the appeal may be disposed in terms of the
compromise.
5. Respondent No.3 has filed a memo dated
19-1-2022 agreeing for the terms of the compromise.
6. The compromise petition dated 23-11-2021
and the memo dated 19-1-2022 are taken on record.
7. The appellant, respondent No.1 and the
Authorized Officer of respondent No.3 are present by
way of video conference and they are duly identified by
their respective Advocates.
8. The parties and their Advocates state that they
have agreed to the compromise. Accordingly, the appeal
is disposed as per the terms of the compromise dated
23-11-2021.
Further it is also clarified that in the light of the
memo filed by respondent No.3, respondent No.3 is also
bound by the said compromise.
Office to draw modified decree accordingly.
The parties are entitled to take back the original
documents produced after furnishing photo copies of the
same for office purpose.
In view of disposal of the appeal, the pending IAs
do not survive for consideration and they are
accordingly disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE
tsn*
