Sri. B.M. Anil Babu vs Smt. Saraswathi
2022 Latest Caselaw 5199 Kant

                         1



  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH, 2022

                      BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

      REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.2148 OF 2019 (EJE)

BETWEEN:
SRI.B.M.ANIL BABU
S/O SRI MADHU B.A.
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
NO.27, 6TH MAIN ROAD
GANDHINAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 009
REPRESENTED BY HIS FATHER/PA HOLDER
SRI.MADHU B.A
S/O LATE SRI.B.S.ANJANEYULU
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS
NO.27, 6TH MAIN ROAD
GANDHINAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 009

                                       ...APPELLANT

(BY SRI.NARAYANA S, ADVOCATE)

AND

SMT.SARASWATHI
W/O SRI B.SAMPATHRAJ
AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS
R/AT NO.19/4, 3RD CROSS
GANDHINAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 009
REPRESENTED BY HER POWER OF ATTORNEY
SRI.GOWTHAM B.S.
                           2



S/O SRI.B.SAMPATHRAJ
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
R/AT NO.19/4, 3RD CROSS
GANDHINAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 009

                                       .....RESPONDENT

(BY SRI.SHARATH S.GOGI, ADVOCATE)

     THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 96 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND
DECREE DATED 07.08.2019 PASSED IN O.S.NO.6352/2013
ON THE FILE OF THE XL ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, PARTLY DECREEING THE
SUIT FOR EJECTMENT.

     THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL COMING ON FOR
FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

                     JUDGMENT

Both parties having resolved the matter amicably

presented a compromise petition on 09.02.2022. In

the said compromise petition at para No.7, the

appellant was required to make certain payments to

the respondent - landlord towards arrears of rent.

2. Having presented the above said compromise

petition, both parties found that there is some

typographical error at para No.7 of the compromise

petition whereby due to oversight, the amount is

wrongly shown as Rs.5,26,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs

Twenty Six Thousand Only) instead of Rs.8,63,250/-

(Rupees Eight Lakhs Sixty Three Thousand Two Fifty

Only). It is in this context, the earlier compromise

petition is sought to be withdrawn and today, a memo

is filed to that effect seeking leave of this Court to

withdraw earlier compromise petition dated

09.02.2022 by filing a fresh compromise petition.

3. In terms of the memo dated 22.03.2022, the

parties are permitted to withdraw earlier compromise

petition dated 09.02.2022.

4. This captioned Regular First Appeal is filed by

the appellant - tenant questioning the judgment and

decree dated 07.08.2019 passed in O.S.No.6352/2013

on the file of the 40th Additional City Civil and Sessions

Judge, Bengaluru (CCH No.41) for ejectment.

5. Both parties have arrived at amicable

settlement and in terms of the settlement, today a

fresh compromise petition is filed which is duly signed

by both the parties.

6. This Court has verified the same and on

verification, the appellant - tenant and the respondent

- landlord have stated before this Court that they

have voluntarily resolved to settle the matter and both

have signed the compromise petition after having

gone through the terms and conditions.

7. The SPA Holder of the appellant, who is none

other than the father of the appellant - tenant, is

present before this Court. The SPA Holder of the

respondent - landlord, who is none other son of the

respondent - landlord, is also present before this

Court and they are represented by their respective

counsel.

8. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant -

tenant in terms of para No.8 of the compromise

petition, today, has paid a sum of Rs.4,13,250/-

(Rupees Four Lakhs Thirteen Thousand Two Fifty

Only) by way of two demand drafts bearing

No.091272 dated 02.03.2022 for a sum of

Rs.2,67,250/- and bearing No.091381 dated

21.03.2022 for a sum of Rs.1,46,000/- drawn on

Federal Bank and the same are handed over to the

son of the respondent - landlord. The photocopies of

the said demand drafts are also placed before this

Court.

9 At this juncture, the learned counsel

appearing for the appellant as well as learned counsel

appearing for the respondent submit that the

appellant - tenant has deposited arrears of rent before

the Trial Court in both O.S.No.6352/2013 as well as

pending execution proceedings in E.P.No.705/2020 on

the file of the 40th Additional City Civil and Sessions

Judge, Bengaluru (CCH No.41).

10. Perused the compromise petition. The said

compromise is lawful and the same is entered into out

of their free will and consent. None of the parties who

are signatories to the compromise petition have

complained any duress, coercion or undue influence.

This compromise petition is admitted and is taken on

record.

11. Accordingly, this appeal is disposed of in

terms of the compromise petition.

12. Draw decree in terms of the compromise

petition placed on record by the parties.

13. In view of amicable settlement arrived at

before this Court, the Registry shall refund the court

fee in accordance with law.

14. The respondent - landlord is entitled to seek

release of the arrears of rent deposited before the

Trial Court by filing appropriate application. If such an

application is filed, the amount shall be released in

favour of the respondent - landlord after verifying and

securing proper identification.

Sd/-

JUDGE

NBM