Karnataka High Court
The K.C.C. Bank Ltd vs Sanganabasappa Veerabhadrappa ... on 30 August, 2023
Bench: C.M.Poonachapresided Bycmpj
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:9750
RSA No. 5496 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 5496 OF 2013 (INJ-)
BETWEEN:
THE K.C.C. BANK LTD,
R/BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER,
DHARWAD.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. S. D. GAMANAGATTI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SANGANABASAPPA VEERABHADRAPPA TURAMARI
SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS
1(a) SUWARNA W/O. SANGANABASAPPA TURAMARI
Digitally
signed by
AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
SHIVAKUMAR R/O. SAVADATTI ROAD, HAVERIPETH,
SHIVAKUMAR HIREMATH
HIREMATH Date: DHARWAD-580001.
2023.09.05
15:07:42
+0530
1(b) SMT. PRIYADARSHNI W/O. UMESH ANGADI
AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE SERVICE,
R/O. SAVADATTI ROAD, HAVERIPETH,
DHARWAD-580001.
1(c) SANTOSH S/O. SANGANABASAPPA TURAMARI
AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. SAVADATTI ROAD, HAVERIPETH,
DHARWAD-580001.
1(d) HARISHKUMAR S/O. SANGANABASAPPA TURAMARI
AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE SERVICE,
R/O. SAVADATTI ROAD, HAVERIPETH,
DHARWAD-580001.
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:9750
RSA No. 5496 of 2013
2. MURIGEPPA S/O. VEERABHADRAPPA TURAMARI
AGE: 59 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS
R/O. 3RD CROSS, NARAYANPUR,
DHARWAD.
3. SIDDALINGAPPA S/O. VEERABHADRAPPA TURAMARI
AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS
R/O. 3RD CROSS, NARAYANPUR,
DHARWAD.
4. SMT. SULACHANA W/O. SHIVAYOGI TURAMARI
AGE: 54 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O.SAVADATTI ROAD, HAVERIPETH,
DHARWAD-580001.
5. THE SALES OFFICER NO.1
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
DHARWAD-580001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. M. C. BANDI, ADV. FOR R3 AND R4;
SRI. DAYANAND M. BANDI, ADV. FOR R1 (A TO D);
R2 IS DEAD;
NOTICE TO R5 IS DISPENSED WITH)
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED R/S. 100 R/W.
ORDER 42 RULE 1 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE
DTD: 26.02.2013 PASSED IN R.A.NO. 107/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE
PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, DHARWAD, PARTLY
ALLWOING THE APPEAL, FILED AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT DTD:
16.10.2012 AND THE DECREE PASSED IN O.S.NO. 328/2009 ON THE
FILE OF THE II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) AND JMFC II AT
DHARWAD, DISMISSING THE SUIT FILED FOR PERMANENT
INJUNCTION.
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS,
THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Learned counsel for appellant and learned counsel for
respondent are present.
NC: 2023:KHC-D:9750
RSA No. 5496 of 2013
2. Learned counsel for appellant has filed a memo for
reporting settlement which reads as follows:
"Memo Reporting Settlement
This Regular Second Appeal has been filed against
the judgment and decree dated 26/02/2013 passed by
Principal Senior Civil Judge & CJM Dharwad in R.A.No:
107/2012. The appellant by way of this Regular Second
Appeal has sought to fix the liability upon the
respondents as per Award No: and JRL/B/DAM/01/93-94
and JRJ/B/DAM/20/93-94(Ex-P6 passed by Assistant
Registrar of Co-Op Societies Dharwad. During pendency
of this Regular Second Appeal, the compromise is taken
place between the Appellant Bank and the Respondents
and the Respondents have paid Rs.15,76,539-72 to the
Appellant bank and the Appellant Bank has considered
the same as full and final settlement toward the above
mentioned award. Now the Appellant Bank submits that
the entire claim as against all the respondents is satisfied
and nothing remained. The letter of the Appellant Bank
dated 25/08/2023 is produced herewith to evidence the
satisfaction of the Bank towards claim amount. So the
Appellant Bank most respectfully submits that to close
this Regular Second Appeal as entire claim against the
Respondents is satisfied and no claim whatsoever against
any of the respondents is remained with the appellant
bank.
Hence this memo."
NC: 2023:KHC-D:9750
RSA No. 5496 of 2013
3. Along with the said memo, the learned counsel for
appellant has also furnished a copy of a letter dated
25.08.2023 issued by the appellant/ Bank.
4. The respondents filed a suit in OS No.328/2009 for
declaration that the plaintiffs are not liable to pay any money
pursuant to the award made in favour of the defendant/Bank
and for injunction to restraint the defendant Bank from
proceeding with the recovery proceedings. The suit filed by the
plaintiffs was dismissed vide judgment and decree dated
16.10.2012 by the trial Court. Being aggrieved the plaintiffs
preferred RA No.107/2012. The First Appellate Court by its
judgment and decree partly allowed the appeal and passed the
following:
ORDER
The appeal filed by the plaintiffs is partly
allowed.
The Judgment and Decree passed in
O.S.No.328/2009 dated : 16.10.2012 is modified.
The suit of the plaintiffs No.1 to 3 is partly
decreed. The defendants are hereby restrained by
way of permanent injunction from proceeding
against the plaintiffs No.1 to 3 to recover the
NC: 2023:KHC-D:9750
RSA No. 5496 of 2013
amount as per Ex.P6. However, the defendants
are at liberty to proceed against the plaintiff No.4
if she has succeeded the properties of Shivayogi
Turamari.
Accordingly, office is directed to draw
decree.
However, there is no order as to costs.
Send back the LCR with copy of the
Judgment.
5. Being aggrieved the defendant/ Bank has preferred
the present Second Appeal.
6. It is forthcoming from the judgment and decree
passed by the First Appellate Court that the suit of the plaintiff
Nos.1 to 3 have been decreed and the defendant/ Bank was
restrained by an order of injunction from proceeding against
plaintiff Nos.1 to 3. However, the defendants were at liberty to
proceed against plaintiff No.4.
7. Having regard to the memo for settlement filed by
the appellant/ Bank and the letter dated 25.08.2023 which
evidences the receipt of the entire money payable by the
appellant/ Bank, it is just an expedient that the decree passed
NC: 2023:KHC-D:9750
RSA No. 5496 of 2013
by the First Appellate Court be modified to also injunct the
defendants from proceeding against the plaintiff No.4.
8. In view of the aforementioned, I pass the following:
ORDER
i) The above appeal is disposed of.
ii) The judgment and decree passed by the
First Appellate Court is modified to the
extent that the liberty given to the
defendant to proceed against plaintiff
no. 4 is set-aside and the defendant is
restrained from proceeding against the
plaintiff No.4/respondent No.4 also from
recovering any money as per Ex.P6.
iii) The judgment and decree of the First
Appellate Court in all the other aspects
remain unaltered.
(Sd/-)
JUDGE
PJ
