Karnataka High Court
Smt Jyothi vs Smt Jayamma on 11 December, 2023
Author: V Srishananda
Bench: V Srishananda
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:45009
RFA No. 839 of 2008
C/W RFA No. 838 of 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL No.839 OF 2008(INJ)
C/W REGULAR FIRST APPEAL No.838 OF 2008(DEC)
IN R.F.A.No.839/2008
BETWEEN:
SRI K MANI
SINCE DEAD BY LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES
1(a) SMT JYOTHI
W/O LATE K MANI
APPELLANT No.1(a) PASSED AWAY
ON 20.04.2013, 1(b) and 1(c) ARE HER LEGAL
REPRESENTATIVES
1(b) SRI RAGHU
S/O LATE K MANI
Digitally AGED 39 YEARS
signed by R
MANJUNATHA
Location: 1(c) SMT VARALAKSHMI
HIGH COURT W/O. LATE K MANI
OF
KARNATAKA AGED 40 YEARS
DELETED AS PER ORDER OF THE
HON'BLE COURT DATED 11.12.2023
ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF NO.81,
CHOKKASANDRA COLONY
T. DASARAHALLI,
BANGALORE - 57
...APPELLANTS
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:45009
RFA No. 839 of 2008
C/W RFA No. 838 of 2008
(BY SRI K.N.NITISH FOR SRI K V NARASIMHAN, ADVOCATES
FOR APPELLANT NO.1(b);
VIDE ORDER DATED 11.12.2023, APPELLANT NO.1(c) IS
DELETED;
VIDE ORDER DATED 10.03.2023, 1(b) AND 1(c) ARE TREATED
AS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES OF APPELLANT NO.1(a))
AND:
SMT JAYAMMA
W/O. JAVARAIAH
MAJOR
R/O. NO.42, 5TH CROSS,
5TH MAIN ROAD,
M DASARAHALLI
BANGALORE -57.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI B T INDUSHEKAR, ADVOCATE)
THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
96 OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE AGAINST THE JUDGMENT
AND DECREE DATED 23.2.08 PASSED IN O.S.NO.5900/92 ON
THE FILE OF THE XXXIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS
JUDGE, BANGALORE CITY (CCH.33), DISMISSING THE SUIT
FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION.
IN R.F.A.No.838/2008
BETWEEN
1. SMT JYOTHI
W/O LATE K MANI
AGED 65 YEARS
APPELLANT No.1 PASSED AWAY,
APPELLANT NO.2 and 3 ARE HER LEGAL
REPRESENTATIVES
2. SRI RAGHU
S/O LATE K MANI
AGED 39 YEARS
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC:45009
RFA No. 839 of 2008
C/W RFA No. 838 of 2008
3 SMT VARALAKSHMI
W/O. LATE K MANI
AGED 40 YEARS
DELETED AS PER ORDER OF THE
HON'BLE COURT DATED 11.12.2023
ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF NO.81,
CHOKKASANDRA COLONY
T. DASARAHALLI,
BANGALORE - 57
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI K.N.NITISH FOR SRI K V NARASIMHAN, ADVOCATES
FOR APPELLANT NO.2;
VIDE ORDER DATED 11.12.2023, APPELLANT NO.3 IS
DELETED;
VIDE ORDER DATED 10.03.2023, A2 AND A3 ARE TREATED AS
LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES OF APPELLANT NO.1)
AND:
SMT JAYAMMA
W/O. JAVARAIAH
MAJOR
R/O. NO.42, 5TH CROSS,
5TH MAIN ROAD,
M DASARAHALLI
BANGALORE -57.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI B T INDUSHEKAR, ADVOCATE)
THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
96 OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE AGAINST THE JUDGMENT
AND DECREE DATED 23.2.2008 PASSED IN O.S.NO.8829/2001
ON THE FILE OF THE XXXIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS
JUDGE, BANGALORE CITY (CCH.33), DECREEING THE SUIT FOR
DECLARATION OF TITLE AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION.
-4-
NC: 2023:KHC:45009
RFA No. 839 of 2008
C/W RFA No. 838 of 2008
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR REPORTING
SETTLEMENT, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Appellant No.1(b)-Raghu is present. G.Rangaswamy-
General Power of Attorney Holder of respondent-Jayamma is
present.
2. Parties present a compromise petition under Order XXIII
Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, duly signed by the parties
and their respective advocates.
3. The contents of the compromise petition is read over to
the parties. Parties submit that the terms of the compromise
petition depict the true terms of settlement. They also
unequivocally submit that there is no force, coercion or undue
influence in reaching out the compromise.
4. Rs.3,00,000/- is paid by the appellant to the Power of
Attorney holder of the respondent, today, in the open Court in
cash. Same is acknowledged by Sri Rangaswamy, GPA Holder
of respondent. Balance sum of Rs.47,00,000/- is to be paid by
the appellant to the respondent as is mentioned in the
compromise petition.
NC: 2023:KHC:45009
5. Accordingly, there is no impediment for this Court to
accept the compromise petition and dispose of the appeals in
terms of the compromise petition.
Hence, the following:
ORDER
(i) Appeals stand disposed of in terms of the
compromise petition.
(ii) Office is directed to draw the modified
decree in terms of the compromise petition
appending the copy of compromise petition
as part of the decree.
(iii) Let there be a first Charge on the property
in favour of respondent and after payment
of balance sum of Rs.47,00,000/-, Charge
created on the property get extinguished.
(iv) No order as to costs.
(v) Appellant is entitled for the refund of
permissible Court Fee.
Sd/-
JUDGE
kcm
