Karnataka High Court
Sri. Syed Muneel Ahmed vs Syed Musheer Riyaz on 30 March, 2022
Bench: R. Nataraj
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF MARCH, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.NATARAJ
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.1095 OF 2020 (PAR)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. SYED MUNEER AHMED
S/O LATE. GHOUSE PEER SAB,
AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS
2. SMT. SHAHANAZ SHIRGOR
W/O SYED MUNEER AHMED
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS
3. SRI. SYED HASHAM PEER
S/O SYED MUNEER AHMED,
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS
ALL ARE RESIDING AT
KESARMADU VILLAGE,
OORDIGERE HOBLI,
TALUK AND DISTRICT,
TUMKUR 572 104.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. SHRIDHARA K, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SYED MUSHEER RIYAZ
S/O LATE SYED MOMIN BASHA,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
2
R/AT NO.302-276, 2ND FLOOR,
4TH CROSS, 7TH MAIN,
MINHAJ NAGAR, J.P. NAGAR,
BENGALURU 560 078.
2. SRI. RAJENDRA KUMAR
S/O NANJUNDAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS
3. SRI. VENKATARAMAIAH
S/O THIMMAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
BOTH ARE RESIDENTS OF
KESARMADU VILLAGE,
OORDIGERE HOBLI,
TUMKUR 572104.
....RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. FAYAZ SAB B.G., ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT
NO.1
NOTICE TO RESPONDENT NOS.2 AND 3 IS DISPENSED
WITH VIDE ORDER DATED 30.03.2022)
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 100 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 18.06.2020
PASSED IN R.A. NO.256/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE VII
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, TUMAKURU, PARTLY
ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE
JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 11.10.2019 PASSED IN
O.S. NO.20/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDITIONAL
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, TUMAKURU.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
3
JUDGMENT
This appeal arises out of a suit for partition which
was dismissed by the Trial Court and an appeal preferred
before the First Appellate Court was allowed and the suit
was decreed declaring that the plaintiff is entitled to 7/48th
share in the suit schedule 'C' and 'D' properties.
2. The appellants and respondent No.1 have
reported a compromise and have filed the petition under
Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908,
the terms of which read as follows:
"4) Now at the intervention of relatives
and elderly persons of the village and with an
intention to keep peace and harmony among all the
family members, the Appellants and Respondent
No.1 have amicably settled all their disputes and
wish to put an end to all the differences as per the
terms mentioned below-
A) The Respondent No.1 admits that the
suit schedule "A" property bearing Survey
No.136/2 measuring 1-acre 10 Gunthas is the 'self
acquired' property of Appellant No.3 Syed
Hasham Peer having been purchased for a
consideration of Rs.86,500/- under Registered sale
deed dated 27.01.2003. He further admits that the
Appellant No.3 said Hasham Peer is the owner and
possessor of said property.
B) The Respondent No.1 admits that suit
schedule "B" property bearing Sy.No.135/1
measuring 0 acre 39 gunthas is the 'self acquired'
property of Syed Adil who is the son of defendant
No.1 having been purchased for a consideration of
Rs.1,05,000/- under a Registered sale deed dtd-
03-07-2001. He further admits that the said Syed
Adil is the owner and possessor of said property.
C) The Respondent No.1 admits that the
Appellant No.1 Syed Muneer Ahmad is the owner
and possessor of suit schedule C, D properties. The
Respondent No.1 further admits that his mother
Smt.Raheemunnissa has orally gifted her share in
C,D properties to the Appellant No.1 Syed Muneer
Ahmad on 15-04-1978. The Respondent No.1
further admits that the name of Appellant No.2
Smt. Shahanaz (wife of Appellant No.1) is
appearing in the Revenue Records.
D) The Respondent No.1 admits that the
Appellant No.1 Syed Muneer Ahmad is the owner
and possessor of suit schedule "E" property bearing
Sy.No.139/1 measuring 0 Acre 37 Gunthas.
E) The Respondent No.1 admits that he
has no right, title and interest over the above said
suit schedule "A to E" properties. He further
admits that the Appellants are the owners and
possessors of above said suit schedule "A to E"
properties.
F) The Respondent No.1 or any person or
persons claiming through him has no claim over
the suit schedule "A to E" properties.
G) The Respondent No.1 undertakes not
to interfere in any manner whatsoever in the
Appellant's peaceful possession and enjoyment of
suit schedule "A to E" properties. The Appellants
are at full liberty to deal with the suit schedule
properties as per their choice.
H) The Appellants are liberty to get the
suit schedule properties divided and get a separate
Survey number for the suit properties by filing
necessary Applications before the Revenue/Survey
Authorities. The Respondents No.1 undertakes not
to obstruct the said survey and division of the suit
schedule properties and will extend his full and
unconditional co-operation for the said division.
I) The Respondent No.1 admits that
apart from the suit schedule "A to E" properties, his
mother Syeda Raheemunnissa has orally gifted her
share in other Ancestral Properties in favour of
Syed Muneer Ahmad and said Syed Muneer Ahmad
has sold those properties long back to the third
persons and the third persons are in use and
enjoyment of those properties.
J) As the Respondent No.1 has incurred
huge amount towards litigations from the Trial
Court to this Hon'ble Court hence, today the
Appellants have paid a cash of Rs.50,000/- to the
Respondent No.1 towards the 'litigation expenses'
etc. The Respondent No.1 acknowledges the same.
K) The Respondent No.1 has given up all
his contentions raised before the Lower Courts.
L) The Respondents No.2 and 3 are
formal parties. There is no relief claimed against
them.
M) It is clarified that the term Appellants
and Respondent No.1 used in this Compromise
includes their respective Legal Heirs, Agents,
Assignees, Purchasers or any persons claiming
through the respective parties in any manner
whatsoever.
N) The Appellants are entitled to execute
and enforce this Decree against the Respondent
No.1 in case he does not comply with any of the
terms of this Decree."
3. As part of this compromise, the appellants
have paid a sum of Rs.50,000/- to the respondent No.1
towards litigation expenses and the respondent No.1 has
accepted to release all his right, title and interest in the
suit properties. The appellants and respondent No.1 are
present before the Court and are identified by their
respective counsel. The parties have affixed their
signatures to the order sheet of this Court in token of their
acceptance of the terms of the compromise petition.
4. It is seen that the appellants and the
respondent No.1 are closely related and since the
respondent No.1 would be entitled to 7/48th share in the
suit 'C' and 'D' schedule properties as per the judgment
and decree of the First Appellate Court, which is very
miniscule, having regard to the nature of the suit 'C' and
'D' schedule properties, the compromise entered into
between the parties is just and fair and the same is
accepted.
5. In view of the above, the impugned Judgment
and Decree dated 18.06.2020 passed by the First
Appellate Court in R.A. No.256/2019 is set aside and this
Second Appeal is disposed off in terms of the compromise
petition.
Office is directed to draw a decree in terms of the
compromise petition.
Sd/-
JUDGE
sma
