Smt. Thimmakka vs Sri V Rajanna
2023 Latest Caselaw 5358 Kant

                                                 -1-
                                                        NC: 2023:KHC:27729
                                                             RFA No. 1923 of 2021




                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                               DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2023

                                               BEFORE

                                THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN

                        REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.1923 OF 2021 (PAR/DEC)
                       BETWEEN:

                       1.    SMT. THIMMAKKA
                             W/O LATE HANUMANTHAPPA
                             AGED 72 YEARS.

                       2.    SRI. VENKATESH H.
                             S/O LATE HANUMANTHAPPA
                             AGED 58 YEARS

                       3.    SRI. NARAYANA H.
                             S/O LATE HANUMANTHAPPA
                             AGED 50 YEARS.

                       4.    SRI. KRISHNAMURTHY H.
                             S/O LATE HANUMANTHAPPA
                             AGED 47 YEARS.

Digitally signed by
CHAYA S A              5.    SRI. SHIVAKUMAR H.
Location: HIGH COURT
OF KARNATAKA                 S/O LATE HANUMANTHAPPA
                             AGED 45 YEARS

                             APPELLANTS ARE R/AT NO.9,
                             OLD NO.14/3 OLD MARUTHINAGARA,
                             NOW CALLED AS AMBEDKAR RESIDENCY,
                             2ND CROSS, SHANTHIVANA,
                             SAHAKARANAGARA POST,
                             BENGALURU - 560 019.
                                                                    ...APPELLANTS
                       (BY SRI. SURESH BABU B N.,ADVOCATE)
                               -2-
                                    NC: 2023:KHC:27729
                                      RFA No. 1923 of 2021




AND:

1.   SRI. V. RAJANNA
     S/O LATE VENKATAPPA
     AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
     R/AT NO.58, SHANTHIVANA
     2ND CROSS, AMBEDKAR RESIDENCY
     SAHAKARANAGARA POST
     BENGALURU - 560 092.

2.   SMT. V. MANJULA
     W/O SRI. RAMANUJAM
     AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
     R/AT NO.345, 1ST FLOOR
     SANJEEVININAGARA
     SHAKARANAGARA POST
     BENGALURU - 560 092.


                                           ...RESPONDENTS



(BY SRI. K. V. NARASIMHAN, ADVOCATE)



       THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 READ WITH

ORDER XLI RULE 1 OF CPC.,      AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND

DECREE DATED 15.06.2021 PASSED IN O.S. No.281/2019

ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS

JUDGE, BENGALURU, DECREEING THE SUIT FOR PARTITION

AND DECLARATION.


       THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE

COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                 -3-
                                        NC: 2023:KHC:27729
                                          RFA No. 1923 of 2021




                         JUDGMENT

1. This appeal is filed under Section 96 of CPC by

defendant Nos. 1 to 5 in O.S. No.281/2019 before the Trial

Court, challenging the Judgment and Decree passed in the

said suit, dated 15.06.2021, by the III Addl. City Civil and

Sessions Judge, Bangalore City. decreeing the suit of the

plaintiff as against the defendant Nos.1 to 5 (appellants

herein) and defendant No.6 (respondent No.2 herein).

2. The appellants herein are the defendant Nos.1 to 5 in

O.S. No.281/2019 and respondent No.1 is the plaintiff and

respondent No.2 is defendant No.6 in O.S. No.281/2019.

3. The plaintiff had filed the suit against the defendants,

inter alia, seeking 25% share out of the 50% share that

would be allotted to the share of Venkatappa in the suit

schedule property and the matter was contested. The

plaintiff examined one witness and got marked 23

documents and defendant No.4 was examined as D.W.1

and got marked 43 documents on behalf of the

NC: 2023:KHC:27729 RFA No. 1923 of 2021

defendants. After concluding the trial, the Trial Court

decreed the suit of the plaintiff with costs, holding that the

plaintiff is entitled for 25% share in the suit schedule

properties by metes and bounds which is under challenge

in this appeal.

4. During the pendency of this appeal, both the parties

have filed joint compromise application/ memorandum of

compromise petition under Order XXXIII Rule 3 of CPC

along with documents and both parties have agreed to the

compromise. As per the compromise petition, both side

parties are taking 50% each, i.e. out of 10 guntas of land

in question, 5 guntas of land to appellants herein i.e. land

in Survey No.14/3B of Kodigehalli Village, Yelahanka Hobli

more fully described as Schedule-A property and out of

remaining 5 guntas of land in Survey No.14/3B, plaintiff

(respondent No.1 herein) is entitled to 3 guntas more fully

described as Schedule-B(a) property and defendant No.6

(respondent No.2 herein) is entitled to 2 guntas more fully

described as Schedule-B(b) property. The compromise

NC: 2023:KHC:27729 RFA No. 1923 of 2021

application/petition is in accordance with law and hence,

accepted.

5. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of in view of the

compromise entered between the parties. The sketch

produced which is issued by the Survey Department is

made part and parcel of the Decree.

Draw Decree accordingly.

SD/-

JUDGE

sac