Smt Latha vs Smt Renuka
2022 Latest Caselaw 8648 Kant

                               -1-



       IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

            DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022

                           BEFORE

           THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD

       MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.910/2022 (CPC)

BETWEEN:

SMT LATHA
W/O. GOVINDASWAMY,
AGED 50 YEARS
R/AT NO. 59,
BEHIND CORPORATION HOSPITAL,
HOSUR MAIN ROAD, ADUGODI,
BENGALURU 560030
                                             ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI. B RAMESH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

SMT RENUKA
W/O.LATE. RAMESH,
AGED 41 YEARS
R/AT KADASONNAPANAHALL VILLAGE,
BIDARAHALLI HOBLI,
BENGALURU EAST TALUK,
                                           ... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. SHIVA KUMAR D.M, ADVOCATE)


      THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
ORDER MFA FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(r) OF CPC, PRAYING
TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 25.01.2022 PASSED IN
O.S.NO.4228/2019 BY THE XV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, (CCH-3) AT BENGALURU BY DISMISSING
I.A.NO.1 FILED BY RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF UNDER ORDER XXXIX
RULE 1 AND 2 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE.
                                  -2-



     THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                          JUDGMENT

The defendant in O.S.No.4228/2019 on the file of the

XV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (for

short, 'the civil Court') has called in question the civil

Court's order dated 25.01.2022. The appellant, by the

impugned order, is restrained from dispossessing the

respondent-plaintiff from an area measuring East to West -

19.5 feet and North to South - 45 feet in property bearing

PID No.67-87-4/2 (new Municipal No.4/2) of Adugodi,

Koramangala Road, BBMP 67 Ward, Koramangala,

Bangalore [the Subject Property].

The appellant and the respondent have presently filed

a joint memo setting forth the terms of settlement as

regards the dispute. The learned counsels for the parties,

in continuation of the terms of such joint memo, submit

that the respondent would retain 8 feet x 45 feet to the East

of her property as a passage for the appellant to access her

property from the respondent's property until she executes

sale deed for an area measuring 11 feet x 33 feet to the

West of her property in favour of the appellant.

The respondent's statement in this regard in the joint

memo reads as under:

"The plaintiff/respondent has agreed and undertaken that until execution of the sale in favour of the appellant/defendant, neither she nor her family members interfere with her peaceful possession usage of the common passage measuring to an extent of East to West 8 feet and North to South 45 feet which is situated on the eastern side of the plaintiff's property."

The afore statement is taken on record as an

arrangement that shall prevail until the execution of the

sale deed as contemplated or disposal of the suit whichever

is earlier. Consequentially, the impugned order dated

25.01.2022 in O.S.No.4228/2019 on the file of the XV

Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru stands

modified accordingly.

SD/-

JUDGE

RB