Sri. M Gopalakrishna Bhat vs Sri. M Narayana Bhat
2023 Latest Caselaw 6086 Kant

                                              -1-
                                                             NC: 2023:KHC:31035
                                                           RSA No. 1776 of 2016




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                           DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2023

                                            BEFORE

                           THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI

                   REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1776 OF 2016 (PAR)

                   BETWEEN:

                   1.    SRI. M GOPALAKRISHNA BHAT
                         S/O LATE M VENKATARAMANA BHAT
                         AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS

                   2.    SRI RAGHAVENDRA
                         S/O SRI M GOPALAKRISHNA BHAT
                         AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS

                         BOTH HAVING PERMANENT RESIDENCE AT MAJI
                         VEERAKAMBA VILLAGE
                         BANTWALA TALUK
                         DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT

                         NOW AT NO.2-122, SRI DEVI KRUPA
                         KALLADKA POST
Digitally signed
by SUNITHA               GOLTHAMANJALU VILLAGE
GANGARAJU                BANTWAL TALUK, D.K-574222
Location: High                                                    ...APPELLANTS
Court of           (BY SRI. Y K NARAYANA SHARMA, ADVOCATE)
Karnataka

                   AND:

                   1.    SRI. M NARAYANA BHAT
                         S/O LATE M VENKATARAMANA BHAT
                         AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS

                   2.    SRI VENKATARAMANA PRASAD
                         S/O SRI M NARAYANA BHAT
                         AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
                            -2-
                                      NC: 2023:KHC:31035
                                   RSA No. 1776 of 2016




3.   SRI PRASHANTH
     S/O SRI M NARAYANA BHAT
     AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS

     RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 ARE R/A MULIYA HOUSE
     ALIKE VILLAGE
     BANTWAL TALUK
     BANTWALA DISTRICT, DK-574211

4.   SRI M PURUSHOTHAM BHAT
     S/O LATE M VENKATARAMANA BHAT
     AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
     R/A MITHOOR, KATUKUKKE VILLAGE
     KASARAGOD TALUK
     KERALA-671121

5.   MRS. GOWRI
     W/O SRI P SHIVARAM BHAT
     AGED ABOUT 77 YERS
     R/A PERUODI HOUSE
     POST BERIPADAVU (VIA) CHIPPAR
     KASARAGOD TALUK & DISTRICT-671322

6.   MRS. PARVATHI
     W/O SRI C MAHABALESHWAR BHAT
     AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS
     R/A EDNEER, POST EDNEER
     KASARAGOD TALUK & DISTRICT-671541

7.   MRS. SARASWATHI
     AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
     R/A VOLABAIL HOUSE
     ALIKE VILLAGE
     BANTWALA TALUK
     BANTWALA DISTRICT
     DK-574211
                                         ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. G RAVI SHANKAR SHASTRY, ADV. FOR R1 TO R4)
    R5 TO R7 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
                              -3-
                                            NC: 2023:KHC:31035
                                        RSA No. 1776 of 2016




      THIS RSA IS FILED U/S. 100 R/W ORDER 42 RULE 1 OF
CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT & DECREE DATED 05.07.2016
PASSED IN R.A.NO. 25/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL.
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, D.K., MANGALURU,
DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGEMENT
AND ORDER DATED 24.03.2014 PASSED IN FDP.NO.7/2007
(OLD F.D.P.NO.16/1991) ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. SR.CIVIL
JUDGE AND JMFC., BANTWAL D.K.,

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


                        JUDGMENT

The appellants, respondent Nos.2 and 3 are present.

Respondent Nos.1 and 4 are represented by Power of

Attorney holder i.e., respondent No.3 is present before the

Court. They have filed memorandum of compromise

petition. The terms of the compromise petition reads as

under:

1. On the intervention and advice of the well-wishers of the parties, the parties have agreed for settling the disputes amicably and for the disposal of the above appeal on the following terms.

2. In FDP No.16/1991 and renumbered as FDP No.07/2007 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Bantwal, the division of the suit properties have been made by order dated 24-03-

2014. The divisions were made based on the Court

NC: 2023:KHC:31035 RSA No. 1776 of 2016

Commissioner's report. A sketch has been prepared by the Commissioner, wherein the properties allotted to the appellants ( M. Gopala Krishna Bhat & Raghavendra ) towards their 1/4th share in the suit properties have been described in schedule No.2 of the report of the commissioner. The properties allotted to the share of respondents No 1 to 3 (M Narayana Bhat, Venkatramana Prasad and Prashanth) jointly was described in schedule No.1 of the report of the commissioner. The schedule 3 of the report of the commissioner has been allotted to the share of respondent No.4 (M. Purushothama Bhat). The properties allotted to the share of M. Venkatramana Bhat, now deceased, has been described in schedule No.4 of the report of the commissioner. The parties accept the said allotment of shares to the respective parties.

3. After negotiations, since the appellants have felt that taking schedule 2 allotted to their share will cause inconvenience for better enjoyment of the properties to the respective sharers, they have decided to give their claim over immovable properties if the other sharers pay them a sum of Rs.40,00,000/ ( Rupees Forty Lakhs Only) in lieu of their right over schedule 2 properties. The respondents 1, 2 and 3 accepted the above facts and have agreed to pay Rs.40,00,000/- (Rupees Forty lakhs only) to the appellants and the appellants have

NC: 2023:KHC:31035 RSA No. 1776 of 2016

agreed for the above and thus the appellants have no objection to allot the schedule 2 of the report of the commissioner to the joint shares of respondents No 1, 2 and 3 (M Narayana Bhat, Venkatramana Prasad and Prashanth) subject to the respondents No 1 to 3 paying Rs 40,00,000/ to the appellants.

4. The appellants are entitled to receive the amount in deposit in the Court, including Rs.50,000/- ( Rupees Fifty Thousand only) deposited by the respondents No.1, 2 and 3 towards the share of the appellants in the family house. The said amount shall be refunded to the appellants by paying the same to the first appellant.

5. The respondents 1, 2 and 3 undertake to pay and they shall pay the sum of Rs.40,00,000/- (Rupees Forty lakhs only) to the appellants as under within two months from today:

(i) A sum of Rs. 2,00,000/ ( Two Lakhs only) is paid on 30-08-2023 by cash to the appellant No 1 and the appellant No 1 acknowledges the receipt of the amount in the present compromise petition.

(ii) Balance of Rs. 38,00,000/ ( Thirty Eight Lakhs only ) shall be paid to appellants within two months from today by crediting the amount to the accounts of the Appellants No.1 and 2. ( Rs 19,00,000/ to the

NC: 2023:KHC:31035 RSA No. 1776 of 2016

account of the appellant No 1 and Rs 19,00,000/ to the account of the appellant No 2 ).

(iii) The said amount shall not carry interest for two months from today. However, if the same is not fully paid within two months from today, then, interest shall be paid by the respondents No.1, 2 and 3 to the appellants at Rs.12% per annum on the balance amount upto date of payment in full.

6. All the payments already made to the appellants @ Rs.36,000/- per year as per the interim order passed in the case shall belong to the appellants in addition to the aforesaid payments.

7. On payment of balance amount of Rs.38,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty Eight lakhs only) to the appellants, the respondents 1, 2 and 3 shall be entitled to enjoy the properties allotted to the appellants ( schedule II) in FDP No.07/2007 as absolute owners thereof without any claim or right or interest by the appellants and anybody claiming under them and all the claims of the appellants made in the suit O.S. No.248/1985 will be treated as fully satisfied including the claim for mesne profit.

8. The respondents No.1, 2 and 3 are in possession and enjoyment of the aforesaid properties allotted the share of the appellants.

NC: 2023:KHC:31035 RSA No. 1776 of 2016

9. Sri Rajendra, son of the first appellant born on 25- 09-1985, subsequent to the filing of the suit OS. No.248/1985 in question, has filed an affidavit, confirming that he has accepted the settlement reached as above between the appellants and respondents No.1, 2 and 3 and he will not challenge the settlement.

10. The appellants confirm that on receiving balance of Rs 38,00,000/ ( Thirty Eight Lakhs only ) appellants will not claim any right over the suit schedule properties in OS No 248/1985 including the right over the Kumki and Government lands attached to the suit schedule properties in OS No 248/1985 and the appellants will not object for the application for regularization filed by the respondents No 1 to 3.

11. Each party shall bear his own costs.

Wherefore, the above appeal may be disposed off with the above terms and the final decree may be modified as per this compromise petition and necessary orders be passed and final decree be drawn accordingly in the above case in the interest of justice.

2. The contents of the compromise petition is read

over to them in the language known to them. They have

NC: 2023:KHC:31035 RSA No. 1776 of 2016

understood and accepted the terms and conditions of the

compromise petition. The parties are identified by their

respective counsel.

3. The compromise petition is placed on record.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents has paid

cash of Rs.2,00,000/- to the learned counsel for the

appellants in terms of the compromise petition. Learned

counsel for the appellants acknowledges the receipt of

Rs.2,00,000/-.

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

the compromise. Draw decree accordingly.

Sd/-

JUDGE SKS